Proceedings Delivery and evaluation of forensic science J Fraser Forensic Investigation Department, Kent Police, Police Headquarters. Sutton Rd. Maidstone, Kent ME1 5 9BZ, United Kingdom Presentation before the Joint Meeting of the Forensic Science Society and CAC at Oxford 2003 Introduction A market has gradually developed in the provision of forensic services in England and Wales. The large suppliers are either Home Office agencies or private companies. There are also numerous highly specialist or minor players in addition to fringe players of uncertain status. Investment by central government, particularly in the DNA database, has resulted in increased interest and considerable growth in the spend of individual police forces on forensic science. The declared intention of government is to develop and maximise the impact of forensic science on the criminal justice system [I]. The question I wish to address is: how do police forces make judgements about supply of forensic services that meet their individual needs meet appropriate scientific standards and are in the interests of justice? Achieving this requires the knowledge and ability to evaluate a complex range of criteria from timeliness of service delivery to scientific quality and standards. There is no formal framework that takes into account the variety of provision, complexity of products and risk in this area although Best Value is of some utility [2]. This paper identifies some relevant decision making criteria and proposes a framework for evaluation. Police use of forensic science has had a great deal of attention from 'regulatory bodies' such as Her Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary (HMIC) [3], the Home Office Police Standards Unit and the Audit Commission. There have also been internal studies carried out by the police service itself [4]. Reports from these varying sources have been influential in shaping usage and working practices of police forces but none has explored how to specify and evaluate forensic science provision from suppliers. None of the Best Value reviews published by HMIC [ S ] on their website address the issue of scientific standards or the variety of sources of forensic science products. The following compounds this situation: Lack of knowledge of forensic science in the police service [41 The paucity of structured, objective evaluations of tactical use of forensic science A general reliance on anecdotal evidence of success by police forces A tendency for the apparent complexity of some of the science to overshadow the simpler issues of service delivery Difficulties in comparing suppliers due to variation in products and pricing structures Multiplicity of suppliers in niche areas Supplier marketing activities Cultural differences between scientific and law enforcement organisations. A comparison with the procurement of information technology (IT) is interesting. In broad terms this includes: A user requirement A product/service specification Delivery and price specification A process of evaluation determined in advance. The absence of a structured approach to forensic supply means that decisions may be made on restricted criteria that do not provide sufficient information to make effective evaluations. There is also a danger of being driven by short-term priorities such as price or timeliness at the cost of value and scientific standards. I would assert that a rational judgement about the provision and evaluation of forensic services is predicated on the following elements: A general understanding of the nature of science and scientific institutions A general understanding of scientific quality standards Specific knowledge of the relevant legal frameworks that impact on forensic science and police investigations Demonstrable receipt of the service and confidence of its continued delivery. The Market: Supplier Typology Effective evaluation requires taking into account the variation in structure of forensic providers and the range of services provided. The typology below enables an understanding of the market and the identification of relevant evaluation criteria. O The Forensic Science Society 2003 Key words Forensic science, police, service, evaluation, best practice, suppliers. science&jilstice Volume 43 ~ o . 4 (2003) 249 - 252 Page 249

J Fraser Delivery and evaluation of forensic science Strategic suppliers Strategic suppliers are characterised by: Primary knowledge and experience in the criminal justice sector A comprehensive range of services in volume, serious and major crime Consistency of products and services An integrated response to police needs Significant investment and therefore stake in the sector Formal quality management including third party accreditation of scientific standards Influential in policy and working practice development R&D capability or partnership An international role in forensic science Available to prosecution and defence. Strategic suppliers present wide-ranging benefits to customers and present a low risk high value option across the board. The main weaknesses of strategic suppliers are: A comparatively high level of bureaucracy Slower, less effective communication Standardised, less flexible products Standardised, less flexible services The dangers of 'over marketing'. Primary niche suppliers These suppliers provide a restricted, sometimes very narrow range of products but their core business is forensic science provision. This means that the organisation shares a number of the key criteria with strategic suppliers in terms of their primary experience and knowledge of the forensic sector. They may have an international dimension and are likely to have formal quality assurance systems. They may be associated with or be part of a larger organisation and benefit from this in a number of business dimensions such as financial stability or synergy of R&D programs. Primary niche suppliers are likely to provide one or more products or services to a high standard. They are less likely to be bureaucratic and are potentially more flexible. The main drawback of such suppliers is the restricted range of services. This limits their understanding of the sector and the potential usage of services by police forces. Primary niche suppliers present a low risk, high value option in the products and services that they deliver. Secondary niche suppliers Secondary niche suppliers crucially differ from the above in that the primary purpose of the organisation is not the provision of forensic science. The quality of science in many instances is probably high but this may not be universally so. The level of knowledge of the criminal justice and forensic context is likely to be variable. This is a key criterion which is fundamental to police needs. In some highly specialist, low volume examinations such suppliers may be the only option. On the positive side, such suppliers are likely to be more responsive to user needs in that they are likely to be more flexible and easier to communicate with. Overall, secondary niche suppliers present an increased business risk but if the issues of scientific and legal standards can be managed they may present a valuable source of service provision to police forces. Primary individual suppliers Primary individual suppliers are individuals who provide one or more specialist products or services. They present similar benefits to primary niche suppliers but higher risks in that the user may have 'all their eggs in one basket'. Although they may have extensive knowledge and experience in the sector there may be issues of business continuity or security to be considered. There is also the issue of ongoing individual competence and standards in the absence of an organisation to maintain these. Table 1 Primary criteria for evaluation of forensic service provision. These criteria are fundamental to the provision of any forensic work in that if they are not met the service standard will be unacceptable. Criterion Description Potential evidence Legal standards Understanding and compliance with relevant Evidential statements, reports, interviews etc. law and procedure Understanding and compliance with police investigative procedure Scientific standards Meeting the standards required of the forensic Formal documented quality management sector in addition to more general scientific system standards Declared and undeclared trials External third party accreditation Competence and development of staff (CRFP etc.) Site inspections Page 250 science&justice Volume 43 N0.4 (2003) 249 - 252