Forensic delivery of intelligence outcomes: Quality considerations
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 7, 2026

Enhanced Genetic Analysis of Single Human Bioparticles Recovered by Simplified Micromanipulation from Forensic ‘Touch DNA’ Evidence
Published on: March 9, 2015
Michael L Taylor1, Anna L Heavey2,3
1Intelligence and Forensics Command, Australian Federal Police, Barton, ACT, 2600, Australia.
Abstract:
Forensic intelligence (FORINT) is a powerful extension of forensic science's role in policing and security, enabling forward-leaning forensic contributions for wider effect, including prevention and disruption of crime. However, operational implementation has been inhibited by concerns relating to quality and the potential for misinterpretation or misuse of forensic information. To directly apply laboratory-centric quality assurance approaches to FORINT would be to place it in a Procrustean bed, ill-suited to its transdisciplinary, adaptive, and often predictive approach to generating activity/crime level propositions and other insights. However, FORINT can, and should, be delivered within a principles-based quality management framework, wherein quality is a property of the system - not a restrictive compliance mechanism. Through established quality system principles, intelligence theory and forensic science, and extensive operational experience, a structured FORINT delivery framework is proposed, leveraging recognised constructs such as the 'intelligence cycle' and FORINT praxis with standards familiar to forensic scientists, without imposing rigid, laboratory-focused requirements. Quality considerations are mapped to structured processes across planning, collection, collation, analysis, review & reporting, and dissemination & evaluation. Focus is accorded to leadership, customer/decision-maker engagement, workforce design, and governance. Human factors are recognised throughout, as FORINT analysis involves contextualised interpretation and judgement of complex, incomplete, and uncertain information under pressure. The model is structured to mitigate bias and misinterpretation, ensuring ethical, reliable, and defensible assessments. These recommendations position FORINT as an effective, robust means of maximising the utility of scientific insights, enhancing the outcomes of forensic science and policing intelligence, while maintaining the trust of practitioners, decision-makers, and the public.
Related Concept Videos
Quality Assurance
Quality Control
Quality control helps track data, visualize trends, and identify variations, making it easier to detect deviations that may affect the accuracy of an analysis. One way to do this is by generating a quality control chart, which...
Sample Preparation for Analysis: Advanced Techniques
Acid digestion with strong acids is commonly used to dissolve inorganic materials that are insoluble (do not dissolve) in water. This method can be useful for...
Effects of EDTA on End-Point Detection Methods
In the visual method, metal-ion indicators (metallochromic dyes), which have distinct colors in their free and complex forms, are added to the mixture to signal the titration's end point. They form stable complexes with metal ions, but these complexes are weaker than the corresponding metal–EDTA complexes. As a result, EDTA...
Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care evaluation by...
Types of Reports II: Incident or Occurrence Report
Purposes:
In the healthcare industry, reports play a crucial role in documenting incidents within an agency. The primary objective of these reports is to ensure patient safety, uphold the...