Crime Laboratory Accreditation

The introduction of fingerprinting to solve crimes, which began at the end of the 19th century, highlighted the reluctance of the police to accept technology and testimony surrounding it as evidence in criminal prosecutions. Yet by the end of the 20th century forensic investigations had come to play a larger and larger role in determining both the guilt and the innocence of the accused and even, in some cases, of those previously convicted. The increasing reliance on technology and laboratory evidence has led to concerns by both prosecutors and defenders about the results produced by forensic science labs. If criminal justice professionals and those who serve on juries lack confidence in the professional operation of these labs, the efforts of scientists and their managers will be meaningless. These concerns have resulted in the accreditation of crime labs to ensure that they are following accepted scientific practices.

Accreditation is a process by which any supply of goods or services by a provider is deemed to be in compliance with standards that are deemed suitable to meet the needs of the user and to meet generally accepted standards of accuracy and reliability. In many fields, as in forensics, this has come to mean that the services are reviewed by a third, or neutral, party or organization that is recognized to have expertise in the relevant field. Thus, accreditation relies on the provider receiving recognition by an outside, independent source that the service provided is unbiased and meets the highest professional standards for that field or profession. In the case of laboratory accreditation, the service is the conduct and reporting of tests on materials.

Laboratory accreditation has become the primary means of determining the competence of laboratories to perform specific types of testing, measurement, and calibration. It has enabled users to accept as accurate the tests provided by a lab and has allowed lab personnel to determine whether their work correctly meets appropriate standards. Laboratory accreditation provides formal recognition [Page 587]to competent laboratories and withholds it from those that do not meet professional standards. Meeting these aims requires a formal assessment and recognition by an impartial competent authority that a laboratory is capable of meeting and maintaining defined standards of performance, competence, and professionalism.

There are three main programs in the United States that address accreditation requirements for crime laboratories. These are the National Quality Assurance Standard for Forensic DNA Testing (QAS), the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors/Laboratory Accreditation Board (ASCLD/ LAB) accreditation program, and the ISO 17025 accreditation program provided by a unit within the National Forensic Science Technology Center (FQS-I).

The QAS program is based on the quality assurance standards developed by the DNA Advisory Board. The Introduction to the DNA Advisory Board standards states that the board expected that the community would be able to show compliance through accreditation. The standards were adopted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which discharged its responsibility for ensuring compliance by establishing a training program for auditors in conjunction with a consensus compliance checklist. The ASCLD/LAB and FQS-I programs incorporate the QAS checklist into their own accreditation programs when they are assessing a testing laboratory that includes a DNA section. Some laboratories, such as private contract providers, have sought direct accreditation solely of compliance with the QAS program, and the National Forensic Science Technology Center (NFSTC) provides that service. All three program providers use only auditors who have successfully completed the FBI training. The program requires an annual audit of compliance and external participation in the audit every two years. NFSTC also provides that service to state and local crime laboratories. The competent authority requirement is satisfied through the use of trained auditors and the consensus checklist.

...