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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.