Forensics21: challenging, enabling and improving forensic science

On April 1, 2008, the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA), working in partnership with the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), launched Forensics21, an overarching programme of work aimed at creating a police-led forensic service fit for the 21st century. Dr Simon Bramble, head of police science and forensics at the NPIA and a member of the Forensics21 Programme Board, explains why the programme is necessary, what has been achieved and what we can expect in the future.

Scientific and technological innovation has transformed the world of police forensics as well as creating exciting new opportunities. But sometimes in our quest to embrace innovation we don’t pay sufficient attention to the underlying business systems and processes which support new ways of working, or indeed our most important asset, the people who have to make it work.

The police spend on forensics is estimated to be in the region of £500 million per annum. Just over half of this sum is spent on internal police scientific services such as crime scene investigators, fingerprint specialists, laboratory staff and supporting equipment, while the remainder reflects expenditure on services provided by external suppliers of forensic services.

The two key forensic service areas are DNA and fingerprints. Jointly, they currently yield in excess of 90,000 detections per annum, including the most serious categories of crime.

DNA plays an important part in more than half of all homicide investigations in England and Wales. In February 2008, for example, there were two high-profile convictions which relied on DNA evidence:

•The conviction of Steve Wright for five counts of murder in Suffolk.
•The conviction of Mark Dixie for the murder of Sally Ann Bowman during a gruesome sex attack.

Fingerprints have a longer but equally illustrious history. It is worth reminding ourselves that the conviction of Patrick Magee, the Brighton bomber who attempted to assassinate Margaret Thatcher’s government, was as a result of fingerprint evidence. The identification of the Great Train Robbers was another high-profile success, although there are, of course, many more.

There is no doubting the importance of forensics as a vital crime-fighting tool or indeed the calibre and professionalism of the staff who deliver these services. The challenge is to ensure we use the science and technologies available to us in the most effective way.

Numerous reports have been published, including work commissioned by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) and the Police Standards Unit in the Home Office, which indicates that all is not well in the world of police forensics. This coupled with our own research tells us:

•There are significant variations in performance between forces.
•There is a significant variation in the performance of individual practitioners.
•The processes underlying the submission of forensic evidence are not harmonised.
•Rates of attrition are unacceptable.
•There are significant variations in the ability of forces to convert identifications to detections.
•Forensic service levels are frequently not modelled to demand. Delays in updating marks and prints result in an unacceptable number of potential suspected persons being released from custody.
•There is a fragmented approach to forensic competency assurance.
•Forces are not learning from each other. Best practice is not shared or disseminated.
•A localised approach to procuring forensic services does not offer value for money.

For several years the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), with its partner agencies, has sought to address these issues. This proved difficult, however, without a suitably robust resource to undertake the work. Achieving change requires money and resources.

The creation of the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) on April 1, 2007, afforded an opportunity to revisit these issues and earlier this year the Forensics21 Programme was launched. T