Interviews written and collated by Rachel Oefelein, Chief Scientific Officer at DNA Labs International, Michael Coble, Executive Director, Center for Human Identification, UNTHSC, and Erin Sweeney, VP of Forensic Operations, Bode Technology Reposted from the ISHI Report with permission.
Since Forensic Investigative Genetic Genealogy (FIGG) was first introduced to the general public in 2018, accredited forensic laboratories have led the way in applying quality standards to the methods utilized in FIGG. Renown forensic laboratories Bode Technology, DNA Labs International and the University of North Texas CHI have all recently validated and implemented FIGG in their laboratories following the ISO/IEC 17025 standards. To learn more, we posed a series of questions to the directors of the three labs to learn more about the impact accreditation has on this new game-changing technology.
Who is currently responsible for providing accreditation to labs practicing FIGG, and who should ideally oversee this accreditation process in the future to ensure the highest standards of practice and ethics?
We can think of FIGG as two components – FGG covering the forensic DNA testing portion, and IGG covering the investigative genetic genealogy research and investigative processes. The current providers of accreditation to labs practicing FIGG are ANSI National Accreditation Board (ANAB) and the American Association for Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA). The scope of accreditation under both programs covers the laboratory portion of FIGG only, or the FGG portion. The accreditation is part of the lab’s overall ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation and, if applicable, the FBI QAS. The applicable scope that is added is for Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) testing using Massively Parallel Sequencing (MPS), since those are the markers used in FIGG. For the laboratory piece of FIGG, it makes sense for it to be included in the lab’s ANAB or A2LA accreditation since these are the most commonly maintained and widely accepted accreditations for forensic laboratories.
The next area of focus in the future will be on standardization and accreditation of the investigative process and the genealogical research, or the IGG portion of FIGG. Currently, the Department of Justice has Interim Guidelines for Forensic Genetic Genealogical DNA Analysis and Searching. While the guidelines are only required for Federal cases and federally funded cases, in the absence of other standards, they have served as industry best practices since they were released in 2019
In 2022, the National Technology Validation and Implementation Collaborative (NTVIC) was established with a mission to collaborate across the US on validation, method development, and implementation. In 2023 the NTVIC published Guidelines for Establishing FIGG Programs.
Long before the advent of FIGG, the Board for Certification of Genealogists or The International Commission for the Accreditation of Professional Genealogists (ICAPGen) have provided Board Certification to Genetic Genealogists. There are established Genealogy Standards and best practices to ensure ethical and accurate genealogical research. Some genealogists in the FIGG space are Board Certified, but most are not. Additionally, the reporting style for Board Certified Genealogists varies significantly from reporting in the forensic space and as such many of their standards are not applicable.
Moving forward, we can expect the field will draw upon some of these existing standards and guidelines while also creating new standards specific to forensic investigation. We will likely see requirements for genealogists’ education and training, and certification programs. Eventually these standards will work their way under the umbrella of accreditation. Another piece to keep an eye out for is the varying standards that will be applied on the state level which may be more stringent. States like Maryland and Utah have already begun passing laws specific to FIGG practices.
What are the current challenges in FIGG that make accreditation and standardized practices essential?
There are a lot of new players in FIGG that do not necessarily have forensic experience and that come from strictly genealogy backgrounds or medical and research sequencing backgrounds. Forensic standards have been developed and modified at this point for decades for a reason, to protect the integrity of casework, technologies, personnel, victims, etc. FIGG is a new and rapidly developing field. Without accreditation and standardized practices, we run the risk of the science being used irresponsibly or unethically, or facing challenges in the courtroom, as well as the court of public opinion. We all want FIGG to remain one of the tools in our investigative toolbox and in order for it to last, we must ensure it is used properly. We also need to ensure reproducible results between providers. Often times forensic evidence is limited and FIGG is the last hope for a case. We must ensure the integrity of the evidence from sample receipt through reporting and all the way into the courtroom. Relatively few cases have introduced FIGG in the courtroom, but we can expect this to become more commonplace. Accreditation and standardized practices will help with evidentiary admissibility challenges. Another challenge is the lack of proficiency testing options which leaves accredited laboratories scrambling to create their own tests or work with the existing providers with limited testing options.
Can you explain the validation requirements for FIGG and why they are critical for maintaining the integrity of the process?
The validation requirements for SNP testing for FIGG are no different than any other validation of a new laboratory technology for currently accredited forensic testing laboratories. The validation includes studies for sensitivity, repeatability and reproducibility, precision and accuracy, DNA mixtures, a contamination study and testing of mock evidence or non-probative samples. The validation also ensures the output file is suitable and compatible with the genealogical databases. Depending on the technology used to generate the SNP file, a new area for forensic labs is the bioinformatics that is often required on the backend. That analysis is another important part of the validation to ensure proper file generation. As noted above, the scope of accreditation does not include the genealogical searching and research. However, laboratories are typically assessing the database match results as part of their validations. One area that has differed slightly from previous DNA profiling systems is how quality controls will be applied. Sequencing controls, which were previously only used for mtDNA testing, must now be added and there are challenges and disagreements about the utilization of reagent blanks in validation and testing. SWGDAM released interpretation guidelines for Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) Analysis in January of 2024 that provided some direction for laboratories looking to validate and implement SNP testing.
How does accreditation impact the quality of work in FIGG and the outcomes of forensic investigations?
Accreditation helps to ensure accurate and reliable testing and lends confidence to the results. Accreditation improves the outcomes of forensic investigations by ensuring the methods used are appropriate, sensitive, and reproducible, and that those performing the work are competent. It ensures the laboratories are focused on continuous improvement and follow standardized processes and policies. It also helps to ensure the required documentation will be readily available for legal proceedings and review by other parties. Many new technologies have come about since DNA testing for forensic work begun in the mid-eighties; by staying the course with accreditation it’s essentially following a road map that has been used to successfully implement new methods throughout the years.
In what ways does having a standardized accreditation process affect public perception and confidence in forensic genetic genealogy?
The general public expects that any technology that is utilized to convict or exonerate somebody of a crime has been demonstrated to be reliable. For over 20 years forensic laboratories have embraced accreditation as the best way to demonstrate reliability. As accredited laboratories implementing forensic genetic genealogy, we are demonstrating to the public that this method is being rigorously validated and integrated into established forensic standards. As with any new technology, we are ensuring that FIGG meets the same high standards and processes as other trusted forensic techniques. This can provide further confidence when it’s time to hit the courtroom and all of these practices that have been put into place and documented can now be called upon if needed in questioning.
How do accreditation standards contribute to the admissibility and credibility of FIGG evidence in court proceedings?
Just as with any other forensic technology or discipline, accreditation for FIGG laboratory testing plays a crucial role in the admissibility process. The validation and accreditation establish reliability. By using validated and standardized methods, it is easier for the court to assess the validity of the results. It also helps to establish competence, knowing that those who performed the testing are properly trained and qualified and that the work has been reviewed. It lends credibility to the overall chain of custody process and integrity of the evidence handling. Additionally, accredited labs are required and accustomed to maintaining thorough documentation of all processes and procedures, with the ability to provide all necessary documentation in court proceedings. The most recent technology to experience a battery of admissibility hearings was probabilistic genotyping. If you pull any transcripts from these hearings you will find extensive questioning on accreditation and internal validation.
What are the key components of the proposed certification exam for FIGG practitioners, and how will it influence the field?
It is critical that we, as practicing accredited forensic laboratories, remember that our primary expertise is on the forensic laboratory side. Due to the nature of FIGG, we are now working more closely with investigators than in the past and must recognize that it is different. Forensic laboratories have valuable insights into the intersection of science and the legal system. Genealogists have valuable insights into existing standards and best practices for genealogy. And both crime analysts and forensic genetic genealogists specialize in gathering data from a variety of sources (i.e. genealogical research and DNA results) to assist law enforcement.
A number of working groups have been formed to address this, including the National Technology Validation and Implementation Committee (NTVIC) and the Investigative Genetic Genealogy Accreditation Board (IGGAB). IGGAB has proposed a certification exam that is expected to cover key areas such as genetics, genealogy, forensic science, ethics and practical applications. Undoubtedly, the aforementioned additional stakeholders will be critical voices in any final path forward. Given that FIGG has only been routinely used for the last 6 years or so, without fail additional organizations, particularly on the state level, are bound to emerge.
Could you discuss any specific cases where the lack of standards in FIGG might have impacted the results or legal outcomes?
Due to the COVID pandemic many courts throughout the United States and internationally are very far behind in trials. It’s not uncommon for cases to take 5 or more years before trial begins. So far, there have been admissibility challenges that are ongoing, but time will tell what the impact of the lack of standards, particularly for some of the cases earlier on, will be.
How is FIGG currently affected by international collaborations and comparisons in forensic investigations, does accreditation play a role?
Thus far we have seen some international partners be slower to adopt FIGG testing. Many countries are moving towards an accreditation requirement though for cases outsourced to testing laboratories in the United States. Additionally, on the investigative side there are some challenges internationally with some countries only utilizing one database or the other and the need to pull in international law enforcement entities to liaise between countries.
What role do ethics play in the standardization and accreditation process for FIGG, especially considering privacy concerns and data security?
Ethics is of the utmost importance with FIGG casework and a misstep could jeopardize the future of FIGG. It is critical that not only the laboratory, but also law enforcement and genealogists abide by the terms of service set forth by the database providers and other available genealogy tools. The accrediting bodies noted above all have strict codes of conduct by which we all abide to ensure that we are using this powerful tool responsibly.
As accredited forensic laboratories who have handled DNA data since our inception, we treat every case with the utmost care and strict confidentiality is maintained for the lifetime of the case. Accredited labs are required to have comprehensive policies addressing evidence integrity, facility access, privacy, data retention, and data security. These measures ensure that cases are initiated correctly, all lab processing steps are documented, and the case integrity is maintained. In that respect, extending our accreditation to include FIGG is no different. One of the biggest challenges with FIGG and data security is the sheer volume of the of the data which is astronomically larger than previous testing methods data files. Where is the data stored? How long should it be stored? Is there an offsite backup file in the event of a disaster (fire, flood, tornado) at the laboratory? How do you ensure proper deletion/removal of data when necessary? These are all questions that must be addressed within the laboratories policies and procedures.
Looking forward, how might the standardization and accreditation of FIGG evolve, and what are the potential implications for the forensic community?
As with any emerging technology, standards will evolve. However, the fundamental principles of ISO/IEC 17025 are perfectly suited for a new technology such as FIGG. For validation, this includes reproducibility, sensitivity and precision. It includes training to ensure the individuals carrying out the work are competent in the technology. It includes precise protocols so that the methods can be repeated reliably by others. In all, the ISO/IEC 17025 standards cover different areas which our laboratories diligently follow and allow outside auditors to review to ensure that we are doing what we say we are doing. As with any new technology, FIGG will raise new issues and considerations, but we are confident that the framework of ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation provides the foundation upon which any new standards will be built. In the future, the focus may be on the tools and practices used by the genealogists as well.
