Please feel free to share:
Last week I summed up what I thought the current climate looked like in forensic science research. This provoked some discussion through LinkedIn and twitter, mostly agreement. I thought I would try and develop a couple of ideas of how we can move forward. Meet the ‘Accredited Forensic Research Provider’.
At the bottom of my previous blog I suggested the seeds of an idea, which I will flesh out a little here:
How about the FSSoc mandate that all of their accredited University’s invest in research in some way?
Or maybe introduce a research module in their accreditation?
Link each accredited University with a commercial partner, enabling a two way exchange of ideas and projects.
I would like to suggest the Forensic Science Society (FSSoc) introduce a ‘Research’ module, along with the three main Component Standards (Interpretation, Evaluation & Presentation of Evidence – Crime Scene Investigation – Laboratory Analysis). Successful accreditation would lead to the use of the title ‘Accredited Forensic Research Provider’ (AFRP). This would be applied for by University institutions, along with industry partner(s). This would mean both University and partner companies could use the title.
Criteria for accreditation would include
- Collaboration with industry
- Solid (forensic) research
- Justification of the need
So how do we fund this?
That’s where the Technology Strategy Board come in – they said they have some money so how about a contestable fund? This could be run by the FSSoc and/or the TSB, with ring-fenced forensic science research money. The nature of forensic science as an applied ‘magpie’ science (quote from an unknown person at the FSSoc meeting) means the panel should consist of academics and forensic practitioners. Some of the project costs should be borne by the AFRPs. Having a pot of money specifically for the development of forensic science can only be a good thing.
What do we gain from it?
Collaboration, targeted useful research and hopefully publications in forensic and related journals.
Universities get the input from expert practicing scientists. Expert lectures, research input and ideas generation.
Forensic scientists/Police get access to lab space and students to e able to undertake research. Most universities have project students or could provide a year long placement year (we currently offer this to all SHU students) focused on research. Cheap staff, under a watchful eye of practitioners and academics, both of whom have an interest in the outputs of the project can only help both parties.
In summary
The good: Forensic research fit for both universities and practitioners. A nice new logo to use (AFRP) on websites and business plans.
The bad: Would have to persuade the FSSoc and TSB of the merits of the idea. Contestable funding is always a little controversial.
The ugly: I haven’t really fleshed out the idea. I do not usually share half ideas with people but this one seemed to have something! What do you think? Could it work or do you have a better idea? Please let us all know below!
Thanks for reading – this has had a fair amount of comment or approval on twitter. One issue bought up (thanks to Tiernan Coyle of http://www.contacttraces.com/, on twitter as @ContactTraces) was under such a system who would own the IP? Obviously providers would want the use of outputs whilst academics may wish to patent/publish for their end. A very good question. Any IP experts in the area?
Having been involved in the very lengthy, time- and energy-consuming processes of the ultimately ill-fated CRFP, and gone through nearly 6 months tendering processes for the equally ill-fated Bluelight and Bravo, I am wondering how the logistics would work.
Hi Kate, sorry I missed this comment first time so didn’t respond, I guess a bit like your experience with funding applications! I think there would need to be a robust review system in place lead by the FSSoc (and possibly the TSB). There could also be a clear wish list of what research is likely to be successful to help guide applicants (eg if they don’t think funding taphonomy is of importance there would be little point in writing an application).
I still think it is a seed of a good idea after a few weeks.
Happy New Year to you.
A Happy New Year to you too, and may all your resolutions come to fruition.
It is a good idea and it would be great if it could be made to work!
I admit I had to look up taphomony but would also say that there are connections where one least expects to find them … In the case of the ACPR though there were huge amounts of money and time involved on a government as well as personal level.