Development of a Competitiveness Improvement Framework for Forensic Science Laboratories

Abstract

This study presents a methodology used in developing the competitiveness improvement framework (CIF) for laboratories, in particular, Forensic Science Laboratories (FSLs). The cyclic nature of FSL processes allowed data collection for the purpose of identification of factors affecting FSL performance (cause factors). Flow charts were used to represent mathematical formulations for cause factor measurements and quantification of the baseline data on turnaround time (TAT), backlogs for case files (B g ), turnaround time in the supply chain (T sc ), and employee absenteeism (A b ). By quantifying the cause factors in addition to academic development coefficient (A d ) and complex longevity (L c ) for FSL employees, it was possible to establish the organizational design features requiring improvements. The relevance of cause factors to FSL stakeholders and means of improvement and sustainability were established. A detailed road map towards CIF was presented using D-MAIC methodology. The rated cause factors based on challenges in the FSL business environment were subjected to Pareto analysis to prioritize the challenges in order to improve FSLs' competitiveness. The interrelationship between the three dimensions of competitiveness improvement (process, performance and planning) was presented in terms of the affected six cause factors. Also, the potential lean practices for improving competitiveness of FSL based on measured cause factors have been presented. This paper introduced methods and measures for improving operational competitiveness of laboratories. The CIF was finally presented in a form of a series of three flow charts summarizing all steps implemented in its development with inputs and cause factors involved. Case-file backlogs were identified as one of the cause factors affecting the competitiveness of the (FSL). Backlogs represent case-files that remain unprocessed or unreported within a selected time interval (year, week or month) which leads to increased customer complaints, rework, cost of analysis, degradation of biological samples, etc. Case-file backlogging was quantified in three consecutive years (Y2014 to Y2016) to study variations as case files are processed [2] [3] [4] [5]. Data were collected for the case-files received and case-files processed, difference of which gives case-files backlogged. The time interval for a case-file to be regarded as backlogged was one week, which can translate into backlogged case-files per month or year. A data collection tool was established and used for three laboratory disciplines (forensic chemistry, biology/DNA and toxicology).

Interpol review of forensic management, 2019–2022

“…Quality assurance can be supported in several other ways, many but not all of which are tied to accreditation standards. The following is a non-exhaustive list of quality assurance methods, the details of which can be found either in other sections of this review or in the supporting texts cited: lean six sigma or total quality management approach to improve turnaround time and efficiency [ 11 , 116 , 117 ]; Daku,2019 [ 118 ]; the use of a LIMS or case management system [ 10 , 111 , 119 ]; blind proficiency testing [ 20 , 27 , 30 , 53 , 54 , 108 , 120 ]; improved education or certification of forensic scientists and technicians [ 15 , 20 , [29] , [30] , [31] , 36 , 40 , 52 , 115 , 121 ]; other stakeholders [ 10 , 40 , 58 ]; improvements in organizational culture and stress reduction [ 19 , 23 , 116 , 122 ]; laboratory independence [ 17 , 18 , 52 , 120 ]; effective use of regulation [ 15 , 16 , 31 , 109 ]; improvements in evidence chain of custody and storage [ 10 , 119 , 123 , 124 ]; improvements in crime scene management and testing standards [ 10 , 15 , 125 , 126 ]; and reduction of biases and conflicts of interest [ [15] , [16] , [17] , 20 , 21 , 52 , 53 , …”

“…Over a decade later, mandatory certification or education standards are still not required in most countries, yet some progress in forensic science education has been made often in the framework of accreditation. As an objective testament to this, some human resource data shows that the number of employees with a Master in Science (MSc) has increased, helping support employee promotions, and expected longevity of their tenure at a given laboratory [ 124 ]. There has also been continued support for international education standards and certification to facilitate the investigation of cross-border crimes [ 31 , 115 ].…”

“…Movement of an evidence sample from one step in the forensic chain to the next requires proper packaging, documentation, and transportation to ensure the authenticity and integrity of the evidence expected by accrediting bodies and the courts [ 119 , 123 , 124 ]. Ensuring proper chain of custody is also a best practice to avoid civil lawsuits for lost or mishandled evidence [ 119 ].…”