For years, conversations about prison reform in the United States have focused largely on state systems. That is where the numbers are biggest and where many reforms have taken root. But the federal system, though smaller, plays an outsized role in shaping national policy, setting standards, and influencing how incarceration is perceived across the country.
Today, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) finds itself at a critical moment. Years of operational strain, leadership turnover, staffing shortages, and public criticism have eroded confidence in the agency. At the same time, Congress has reduced the Bureau’s budget, forcing difficult decisions about priorities and resources.
Into this environment stepped Director William Marshall, now just over a year into the job. His mandate is clear but daunting: stabilize a system under pressure while beginning the long process of reform.
Marshall has made it clear that his approach starts with presence and engagement. “My best days are being at those facilities, walking those hallways,” he told me in an interview I did with him last month. “I want to hear what they have to say… I want to understand them.”
At the same time, research from organizations like the Brennan Center for Justice has sharpened the national conversation about incarceration. Their findings challenge long-held assumptions about crime, punishment, and public safety. When viewed together, the recently published Brennan Center research on Prison Reform and the current state of the federal system tell a compelling story about both the need and the opportunity for reform.
The Brennan Center’s work has consistently pointed to a simple but powerful conclusion. The dramatic rise in incarceration over the past several decades has had a limited impact on reducing crime. While incarceration does play a role in public safety, it is far from the dominant factor it was once believed to be.
This finding matters because it reframes the debate. If more incarceration does not necessarily produce more safety, then the focus must shift toward smarter incarceration. In fact, the majority of BOP inmates are minimum or low security inmates, many of them with just a few years until release back to the community.
The report highlights how policy choices, particularly sentencing laws, drove prison populations upward. These were not inevitable outcomes but deliberate decisions, which means they can be changed.
It also underscores the importance of rehabilitation, reentry support, and targeted interventions. Locking people up for longer periods without addressing underlying issues does little to prevent future crime. It can even make reintegration of the person held in custody more difficult.
For the federal system, which holds a significant number of individuals serving long sentences for nonviolent offenses, these insights are especially relevant. The question is no longer simply how many people are in prison, but whether the system is achieving meaningful outcomes.
While the broader policy debate continues, the Bureau of Prisons faces immediate operational challenges that cannot be ignored.
Staffing shortages have become one of the most serious issues. Facilities are often operating with fewer correctional officers and support staff than needed, leading to increased stress, safety concerns, and burnout. In some cases, non-custody staff are being reassigned to cover basic security functions, a practice that underscores how stretched the system has become.
Marshall has been direct about the scope of the problem. “We haven’t trained in over two years… we have people that just aren’t prepared to do their job,” he said in my interview with him.
Infrastructure is another major concern. Many federal facilities are aging, with significant deferred maintenance. Repairs are costly, and with reduced funding, the Bureau must decide which facilities to prioritize and which may no longer be sustainable.
Overlaying all of this is a cultural challenge. Large institutions, particularly those with long histories, do not change easily. Policies may be updated, but changing how people think and operate on a daily basis is far more difficult.
When systems struggle, the consequences are not abstract. They are felt by both staff and the incarcerated population.
For staff, chronic understaffing and inconsistent training create an environment that is both physically and mentally demanding. Retention becomes more difficult, and institutional knowledge is lost as experienced employees leave.
For those incarcerated, the effects are equally significant. Limited access to programming, inconsistent implementation of policies, and delays in reentry preparation all contribute to uncertainty and frustration. These conditions do not support rehabilitation.
Marshall has framed success in terms that go beyond confinement. “We’re not going to be measured by how many people we have incarcerated,” he said in an interview. “We are going to be measured by how many people we release back into society that never come back.”
The Brennan Center’s findings reinforce this point. A system that emphasizes confinement without effective preparation for release is not just inefficient, it is counterproductive.
Against this backdrop, Director Marshall has begun to outline a path forward.
In his first year, he has taken a hands-on approach, visiting facilities across the country and engaging directly with staff. That visibility matters. It signals that leadership is not removed from the realities on the ground.
His early priorities have focused on staffing, training, and accountability. Rebuilding the workforce is essential, not just in terms of numbers but in terms of preparedness and morale.
He has also emphasized a more open relationship with oversight bodies. “We’ve developed a really good relationship with the Inspector General,” Marshall said, “We’ve invited them into our facilities… to show them that we are serious about change.”
This level of transparency marks a departure from past practice and reflects a broader effort to rebuild trust.
If the federal system is to move forward, reform must go beyond incremental changes.
First, it must address sentencing policy. While the BOP does not control sentencing laws, it operates within their framework. Judges send men and women to prison with little understanding about the institutions to which they send them.
Second, staffing and training must be stabilized. Without a capable and supported workforce, no reform effort can succeed. Since the BOP stopped recognizing collective bargaining with the union that once represented many frontline BOP workers, Marshall has his work cut out to assure staff he is working in their best interest.
Third, rehabilitation must become central, not secondary. Programs tied to education, job training, and behavioral change need to be expanded and consistently implemented. The First Step Act, signed under President Donald Trump in December 2018, has yet to realize its full potential in both releasing inmates back to the community and in lowering costs of incarceration.
Fourth, reentry must be treated as a core function. Preparing individuals to return to society should begin early in their incarceration and it should also allow inmates to serve a greater portion of their sentence in the community. Currently a shortage of halfway houses has led to many inmates staying in prison longer than they could under both the First Step Act and Second Chance Act.
Marshall has made clear that reform requires ownership at every level. “We’re going to own everything that we have,” he said in an interview. “I’m not going to be a person that hides behind a curtain.”
The Brennan Center’s research provides a roadmap for thinking differently about incarceration. Marshall’s early actions suggest an effort to bring those ideas into practice within the federal system.
The BOP stands at a crossroads.
On one side is the status quo, a system defined by strain, inefficiency, and missed opportunities for reform. On the other is the possibility of meaningful change, driven by leadership, informed by research, and supported by a broader shift in how the country thinks about incarceration.
Director William Marshall’s first year suggests that he understands both the scale of the challenge and the urgency of the moment. The question now is whether that momentum can be sustained.
The window for reform is open, but it will not remain open indefinitely.
Follow me on LinkedIn or Twitter or Forbes. Check out my website or some of my other work here.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
