11.24.08 - City of Indianapolis

1

Date: November 21, 2008

To: Mayor Ballard

From: Michael Huber and Kristen Tusing, Office of Enterprise Development

Re: IndyStat – Forensic Services meeting Friday 11/24/08

CC: Michael Medler, Director of Forensic Services Paul Okeson, Chief of Staff

Sarah Taylor, Director of Constituent Services

David Reynolds, Controller

Chris Cotterill, Corporation Counsel Kevin Ortell, Interim Chief Information Officer

The first Forensic Services IndyStat meeting was held September 26, 2008. The following items

appeared in the follow-up memo issued after the meeting.

Business Plan

Follow-up Action. Provide the Forensic Services business plan for 2008. Provide an example of

a performance evaluation for staff. How often are they preformed?

Qualitative Measures

Follow-up Action. Provide (and/or develop) qualitative measures on tests run. How many are

used and how many are thrown out in a given year? How do you measure the quality of the staff’s

work?

Benchmarks

Follow-up Action. What additional benchmarks can be developed now that many peer organizations have adopted the 6 week turnaround time standard?

Costs

Follow-up Action. Provide Cost per Case information. What increment of time would be best to

measure it by? Can we determine a cost saved because of the service?

Turn Around Time

Follow-up Action. Provide breakdown information on what is causing the increase in time for certain types of cases. What type of cases take longer? Are they bench marks set for turn around

time on certain types of cases?

Training

Indy Stat Accountability in Action for the City of Indianapolis

2

Follow-up Action. Provide information on the type of training that is needed. Who should be

trained? What is the current schedule for such training? What resources are needed to provide the training?

Case breakdown

Follow-up Action. Provide breakdown of cases by agency. What agencies utilize the most

resources? Can a cost be assigned to the requests?

Potential Issues for Discussion

Why does the Marion County Forensic Services Agency exist as an entity that is separate

from the Indiana State Police Forensic Lab?

For a typical case requiring forensic testing, what is the division of responsibilities

between IMPD and Forensic Services Agency?

What factors impact Forensic Services’ turnaround time?

Has there been an increase in certain tests requested? What has caused the increase or

decrease?

What is Forensic Services Agency doing to work on the backlog of cases?

What has caused the jump in turn around time for the Trace Chemistry Test?

How is overtime budgeted? What internal controls exist to control overtime costs?

Why is the projected “Items of Evidence Examined” projected to be an estimated 15%

higher in 2008 than in 2007?

What contractors does Forensic Services Agency use to achieve its goals?

What level of cooperation exists and/or is necessary between Forensic Services Agency

and Indiana State Police Forensic Lab?

Forensic Services

IndyStat

November 24, 2008

Indy StatAccountability in Action for the City of Indianapolis


Forensic ServicesNovember 24, 2008

Actual to Budgeted Expenses

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

900,000

Jan-08

Feb

-08

Mar-0

8

Apr-0

8

May

-08

Jun-08

Jul-0

8

Aug

-08

Sep

-08

Oct-0

8

Nov-08

Dec-08

Actual

Budget



Overtime

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

Jan-08

Feb

-08

Mar-0

8

Apr-0

8

May

-08

Jun-08

Jul-0

8

Aug

-08

Sep

-08

Oct-0

8

Nov-08

Dec-08

Actual

Budget



Actual to Budgeted Revenues

(20,000)

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

Jan-08

Feb

-08

Mar-0

8

Apr-0

8

May

-08

Jun-08

Jul-0

8

Aug

-08

Sep

-08

Oct-0

8

Nov-08

Dec-08

Actual

Budget



Qualitative Measures

Administrative Reviews

Technical Reviews

Technical Proficiency Testing

Internal Audits

External Audits

Special Audits

Validations

Competency Testing

Testimony Monitoring Program

Survey Program

Business Plan



Benchmarks

Georgia Bureau of Investigations

Indiana State Police Crime Lab

South Dakota Crime Lab



Turnaround Time (In Days)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Que

stion

Doc

umen

ts

Trace

Che

mistry

Aut

opsy

/Rap

e

Crim

e Sce

ne

Dru

g Che

mistry

Late

nt P

rints

Pro

c.

Late

nt P

rints

Exa

m.

Firear

ms/Too

lmar

ks

NIB

IN

Ser

olog

y

DNA

2007

2008 YTD



Turnaround Time

Barriers

Submission of standards

Availability of examiners

Prioritization of casework

Notice of consumption

Defense expert



Internal Staff Training

Controlled Substances- Bachelors in Chemistry 6-9 months

Trace Chemistry- Bachelors in Chemistry 12-18 months

Firearms- Bachelors in Science 24-30 months

Latent Prints - Bachelors in Science 12-18 months

Questioned Documents- Bachelors in Science 36 months

Serology- Bachelors in Natural Science 12 months

DNA - Bachelors in Science 12-18 months

Crime Scene/FET- Bachelors in Science 6-12 months



Backlog Cases

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

2005 2006 2007 2008 YTD

Backlog



Backlog by Discipline

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Que

stion Doc

umen

ts

Trac

e Che

mistry

Autop

sy/R

ape

Crim

e Sce

ne

Dru

g Che

mistry

Latent P

rints P

roc.

Latent P

rints E

xam.

Firear

ms/To

olmar

ks

NIB

IN

Serolog

y

DNA

2005

2006

2007

2008 YTD



Completed Requests

8800

9000

9200

9400

9600

9800

10000

2005 2006 2007 2008 YTD

Completed Tests



Completed Requests by Discipline

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Que

stion Doc

umen

ts

Tra

ce C

hem

istry

Autop

sy/R

ape

Crim

e Sce

ne

Drug Chem

istry

Latent P

rints P

roc.

Latent P

rints E

xam.

Firea

rms/Too

lmarks

NIB

IN

Serology

DNA

2005

2006

2007

2008 YTD



Requests Submitted

8000

8500

9000

9500

10000

10500

11000

2005 2006 2007 2008 YTD

Submissions



Submissions by Discipline

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Que

stion

Doc

umen

ts

Trace

Che

mistry

Aut

opsy

/Rap

e

Crim

e Sce

ne

Dru

g Che

mistry

Late

nt P

rints

Pro

c.

Late

nt P

rints

Exa

m.

Firear

ms/Too

lmar

ks

NIB

IN

Ser

olog

y

DNA

2005

2006

2007

2008 YTD



Items of Evidence Examined

39500

39550

39600

39650

39700

39750

39800

2007 2008 YTD

Items of

Evidence

Examined



Next Forensic Services IndyStat

Meeting

Friday, January 23rd

9:00am

Room 260

Indianapolis-Marion County Forensic Services Agency 2008 Business Plan

MISSION STATEMENT:

The Indianapolis-Marion County Forensic Services Agency (I-MCFSA) shall provide forensic services to the Marion County Community by supporting the needs of the Criminal Justice System. The forensic services provided shall be built on a foundation of quality, integrity, accountability and ethics. All I-MCFSA personnel shall strive to meet forensic needs of today and into the future in all their work endeavors. I. ADMINISTRATIVE/QUALITY ASSURANCE GOALS A. ASCLD/ISO – preparation for first annual visit.

B. Including in the laboratory manuals the necessary documentation (where applicable) to satisfy the requirement for uncertainty of measurement being in place by December 2008.

C. Process Mapping of DNA Unit, with the possibility of mapping

additional units during the year.

D. Increase DNA audit knowledge.

E. Continue IMCFSA education sessions for the judges, perhaps at their scheduled meeting time.

F. Continuing education for prosecutors and law enforcement officers

both internally and externally. G. Initiate DNA training for burglary initiative. H. Reinstate IMPD Evidence Technician training and include annual

competency testing. II. CHANGES

A. Implement Process mapping as possible.

B. DNA auditor course assignment for QA Manager and DNA

personnel.

III. IMPEDIMENTS

A. Possible lack of sound resources for implementing uncertainty of measurement.

B. Funding and/or time for training for touch DNA and IMPD Evidence

Technicians. IV. ADMINISTRATION/HR/FORENSIC EVIDENCE GOALS

A. Improve training for all employees to include the addition of new

topics incorporated into new employee orientation in the area of “Human Resources”.

B. Improve employee development through positive training programs

that include interaction with fellow employees, handling different situations, creating a positive work environment, new benefits, employee rights, and federal rules and regulations.

C. Continue to work directly with City/County Human Resources as

the transition from the county system is completed. D. To research the availability of grants for the laboratory and to

pursue the funding, to include increasing membership in various websites to make additional grants available to the laboratory.

E. Grant Manager continues to develop, monitor, and oversee the

functions associated with locating, submitting, and administering State and Federal grants to ensure compliance with the Grant Progress Assessments.

F. Establish added responsibility as it relates to all evidence

submissions as the role of Forensic Evidence Specialist expands. G. Provide firearms safety training to Forensic Evidence Specialists in

order to ensure proper handling of weapons submitted as evidence. H. Explore the possibility of transitioning from a paper case jacket

filing system to a digital filing system, reducing the amount of file storage. If not feasible, explore possibility of housing case records offsite. This may also assist in providing additional space for evidence storage.

I. Improve the evidence room systems to include the more timely flow

of evidence out of the system back to the submitting agencies.

J. Work to reclassify entire CSU, Latent Fingerprint Technicians, IBIS Technicians and Forensic Evidence Specialists through

Human Resources.

V. CHANGES A. Develop human resource training for all staff meetings. Incorporate

additional training in new employee orientation. B. Develop customized training sessions for I-MCFSA employees by

discussing section needs with each supervisor. C. Continue the transition to the City Human Resources System by

ensuring our job descriptions, pay grades, etc., are current. D. Develop database for grant tracking, increase grant possibilities by

enrolling in various grant websites, and delegate some grant management duties as total grants increase.

E. Discuss issues/concerns with each supervisor regarding additional

evidentiary responsibilities of the Forensic Evidence Specialist. F. Develop Firearms Safety training program for the Forensic

Evidence Specialists with the Firearms Section. G. Train all involved if the transition from a paper filing system to a

digital filing system is realized. If realized, determine financial impact of additional evidence space in current file room.

H. If file room is not available, locate space for additional evidence

storage.

VI. IMPEDIMENTS A. The development stage of the proposed training may be time

intensive. B. Time involved with establishing policies and procedures for the

transport of evidence for other sections. C. Development of grant tracking database and time involved in for

initial data entry. D. The development stage of the Firearms Safety training program

with incorporation into laboratory policies and procedures.

E. Costs associated with the digital storage system/offsite storage and construction of evidence room.

F. Potential for resistance to change.

G. Funding issues.

VII. OPERATIONS GOALS

A. Monitor all grant funds to ensure compliance for future audits to

include the NFSTC grant progress assessment. B. Continue the development of the I-MCFSA web site to include

customer service comments.

C Continue the “paperwork reduction” program to include looking at a conversion of paper files to improved computer storage. Sections to be looked at this year will be Latent Prints, Firearms Unit and Quality Assurance.

D. Enhance LIMS functionality for users/management to include

upgrade, crystal reports, and Prelog.

E. Bring external vendor online to assist in LIMS support

F. Create analytical PC image library. VIII. CHANGES

A. Work individually with each LIMS Committee Member to strengthen

their abilities within the system.

B Eliminate the requirement to place a hard copy of the analysis reports in the case packets.

C. Changes associated with current case documentation.

D. Work with external vendor to establish communication, reporting

and quality control procedures.

E. Identify and create procedural and resource requirements associated with creation and maintenance of the image library.

IX. IMPEDIMENTS

A. Time and desire to learn how to retrieve statistical information and how to use the data.

B. Lack of desire on the part of current personnel to move away from

current procedures. X. FORENSIC BIOLOGY GOALS

A. Train and bring online newly hired forensic scientists (one part time and two full time analysts) in DNA unit.

B. Validation studies to bring, ABI3130 (Burglary initiative), Identifiler,

Minifiler, Bluestar, Sperm finder on line.

C. Bring completed validations online. Administer competency tests to all DNA Analysts and Serologists in the completed validations.

D. Complete in progress training of DNA analyst.

E. Outsource selected cases, if any, to accredited vendors.

F. Develop Laboratory’s mass fatality response and identification plan.

G. Evaluation of new saliva detection technology.

H. New -80oC freezer to accommodate storage of extracted DNA.

I. New CODIS server to replace current aging server.

XI. CHANGES

A. Implementation of structured training program for newly hired

Forensic Scientists B. Document validation studies as per requirement of the DNA audit

document and implement new protocol for casework.

C. Documentation of serological validation studies and implementation of the validated techniques in forensic casework.

XII. IMPEDIMENTS

A. New validations, plans and automation create need for new protocols which takes away from bench time.

B. Out sourced cases still need “tech reviews”, which is time

consuming.

XIII. FIREARMS GOALS

A. To reduce the total back log by 35% within the next year.

B. To provide throughput time of less than 100 days by the end of this year and 45 days by the end of 2008.

C. To provide educational training to other sections, law enforcement

personnel and judicial personnel.

D. To expand NIBIN entries with regards to the following calibers 223 and 7.62 x 39mm.

E. To bring organization and professionalism to the Firearms Section.

F. To attain benchmarks in analysis through the application of

electronic media. The benchmarks will be set by the Supervisor with input from the section.

G. To continue to provide the best training opportunities to Firearms

personnel. H. To address all concerns and requests put forth by the laboratory

management, judicial personnel and the law enforcement community at large.

XIV. CHANGES

A. Employ electronic media (Adobe Acrobat) for documentation in casework, supply electronic intelligence information (Google Earth on NIBIN Hits) to detectives and enhance courtroom visual presentations.

B. Upgrade firearms accountability regarding training material, the

firearms reference collection, and the ammunition collection. C. Phase out the Excel program and rely on Justice Trax to track case

requests and submissions.

D. Work with Detectives and Prosecutors to increase case evidentiary

value and ensure case analysis is probative. E. Return all retained evidence from RTC cases to IMPD property or

the submitting agency. XV. IMPEDIMENTS

A. Better throughput/turnaround time will lead to more submissions.

This in turn could slow, stall backlog reduction or even lead to an increase in backlog.

B. Again issues of time management and balancing training of outside

agencies with case production.

C. Adding calibers in NIBIN will increase the submissions and tax the resources already stretched.

D. Space is a limiting factor as outside agencies, other than IMPD,

increases their submissions. This will strain limited space already overcrowded by additional FA personnel and new equipment. Innovative ideas at space management will be a necessity.

E. All cases with fired evidence are now Justice Trax cases. This in

turn shows the actual backlog of cases to be worked. Backlog will be a closer reflection of what is examined within the Firearms Section regarding fired evidence. This in the short run will spike the backlog but will address all as actual tracked cases that were previously not counted in the section.

XVI. FORENSIC DOCUMENTS GOALS

A. Continue to travel to all Marion County agencies to discuss the

type(s) of FDE examinations that can be performed. Include new IMPD detectives.

B. Encourage Marion County agencies to submit additional cases due

to new and/or improved exam types, and to a faster turn-around time.

C. Continue assisting ISP with review of FDE cases due to single

examiner and training new FDE people who cannot review cases at this time.

D. Obtain state-of-the-art VSC equipment to improve section capabilities. Grant has been awarded and awaiting final notification of award so purchase can be made.

E. Continue to keep low to no backlog in the FDE Section.

XVII. CHANGES

A. Develop agency training programs and internet accessible

information bulletins for FDE submissions. B. More outside interaction to facilitate meeting with county agencies.

C. Reduction in turn-around time shall cause the amount of time from

submission to results to be tracked and charted.

D. Utilize new digital cameras when necessary for documenting evidence. Evidence that is preserved is scanned but on occasion may require photography with digital camera.

XVIII. IMPEDIMENTS

A. Marion County Agencies fail to commit the needed time to train on

issues related to a forensic laboratory.

B. Space constraints for FDE and FDE equipment have increased due to additional personnel brought into the LP Section.

C. FDE cases may increase beyond the ability/capability of the single

examiner.

D. Budget shortfalls may affect ability to purchase new equipment. Need to consider the time it takes employees to validate new equipment.

XIX. LATENT FINGERPRINT GOALS

A. Continue working with IMPD to set up case examinations and divisions of case types.

B. AFIS now located in Latent Print Unit – cost of maintenance and

upgrades may now be our responsibility.

C. Obtain a more portable alternate light source, e.g., Polylight or Polyray, CrimeScope for use on cumbersome items. These may offer some capabilities that the LumaLite does not.

D. Keep current on policies and procedures for digital photography

and imaging.

E. Increase of cases may be expected with “touch DNA” becoming so popular. Need to make sure we have the personnel to manage increased case work and also need to make sure proper training is offered. An addition of a latent print technician may be beneficial.

XX. CHANGES

A. Develop new protocols on use of digital photography in casework.

B. Increase utilization and proficiency of Justice Trax LIMS.

C. Train new LP Technician to process cases. XXI. IMPEDIMENTS

A. Cost of digital photography and other needed equipment used for LP casework.

B. Continued high submission of LP casework while training new

personnel.

C. Additional efforts to develop improved case management of submitted casework for latent fingerprints may be met with criticism by contributors due to a lack of understanding.

D. Limitations of space for an additional technician – perhaps alternate

shift.

E. AFIS yearly maintenance and upgrade in 2009 may be added cost. Need to keep in mind cost of printing supplies for AFIS.

XXII. FORENSIC EVIDENCE TECHNICIAN GOALS

A. Attend additional training for the AVID system and ensure law enforcement agencies are aware of its forensic applications.

B. Become more familiar with AVID equipment to ensure that we have

the latest updates.

C. Coordinate with the AVID officer with IMPD to bring cases into the lab.

D. Improve computer skills and knowledge within our section. E. Maintain good communication with the Marion County Coroner’s

Office to be aware of the daily cases.

XXIII. CHANGES A. Training of a new employee from the Crime Scene Unit. B. Purchase of Technical Support for the AVID system.

C. Determine which form used within our section can be made into a digital form.

XXIV. IMPEDIMENTS

A. Budget constraints may limit the amount of AVID training we can

receive.

B. Improvement in computer skills will depend on classes available with the city.

C. Forensic Evidence Technicians may be overwhelmed by the

amount of sexual kits to collect from hospitals in one week. D. Locker space at the morgue may become a challenge with the

addition of an employee. E. Backlog of AVID cases for IMPD officer may inhibit our ability to

coordinate with them. F. Rotation schedules of different pathologists with different start times

can disrupt our daily workflow. XXV. CRIME SCENE UNIT GOALS

A. Hire four (4) new Crime Scene Specialists and one (1) Crime

Scene Specialist Technical Leader. B. Implement additional programs to improve the overall quality of

crime scene investigations performed by the CSU personnel. C. Continue to upgrade equipment or obtain new equipment.

D. Train additional CSU personnel in the use of luminol and blood

spatters.

E. Develop an In-service training program for all CSU personnel.

F. Develop a training program in conjunction with the Marion County Coroner and contracted forensic pathologists to improve overall “scene to autopsy” investigations.

XXVI. CHANGES A. Develop new policies for use of new equipment and train

appropriate personnel. B. Improve communication with the Marion County Coroner to ensure

“scene to autopsy” investigations continue to improve. C. Additional in-service training will improve the skills, knowledge and

abilities of CSU personnel. XXVII. IMPEDIMENTS

A. Budget restrictions may limit our ability to purchase new equipment. B. New equipment will force CSU personnel to learn new ways to

conduct an investigation at a crime scene.

D. CSU personnel may be challenged for time when working crime scenes and adding new in-service training programs.

XXV. DRUG AND TRACE CHEMISTRY GOALS

A. High quality forensic services for law enforcement are, and will

remain, the core of our mission. This needs to be continually communicated to the personnel of the unit.

B. Reduce the backlog of cases that some Drug Chemists have and

the backlog in Trace Chemistry.

C. Facilitate improvement in the Drug Chemistry Unit by filling the open drug testing slot, hiring a Trace Chemist to fill the full time slot created out of the part time chemist slot. If the trace chemist on disability returns, bring her back up to speed. If that chemist is unable to return get a qualified (fully qualified preferred / some experience accepted) trace chemist in that slot.

D. Determine a direction for hair testing procedures in the future. A

committee was formed at the September Supervisor’s meeting; get the committee moving and a proposed plan completed by May 2008.

E. Find a way of reducing the tremendous amount of e-mail time and

paperwork (real and electronic) required for the presumptive drug testing program.

F. Relationships which already exist with the ISP laboratory present a

potential for training and co-operation, ex. meetings between ISP and I-MCFSA DNA Units.

G. Retain all personnel that are currently working in this unit. Attempt

to get all personnel in the unit to training during the year 2008.

H. Work with safety committee staff on transitioning safety matters to other laboratory personnel.

I. Perform all proficiency tests correctly and timely.

J. Drug quantitations are a problem right now, in 2008, develop a new

GC/FID method to provide this service to our customers. XXVI. CHANGES

A. Assignment of Chemistry Unit staff to conduct proficiency testing at the

Property Room and outside police agencies for the Q/A and Q/C of the presumptive drug testing program. In 2007 only one proficiency test was conducted, mainly due to drug workload issues. This needs to be improved to biannually (Jan. and July) in 2008.

B. Reduction in staff for Drug Chemistry with a compressed timeframe for

drug confirmation testing had a greater effect than anticipated. The compression issue continues in 2007, the same number as in 2006 or more cases had to be processed in less than 1 day to: pick-up, analyze, prepare report and return drug evidence for court.

C. Training of a new chemist for Drug Chemistry. This again could be a

case where hiring an experienced chemist would greatly reduce training.

D. Training of a chemist for Trace Chemistry. Trace Chemistry backlogs

in hair cases were reviewed in 2007, some were eliminated. Hiring a part time trace chemist greatly helped training.

E. The loss of a trace chemist really put a lot of pressure on the Unit. The

return of this chemist should benefit the unit. XXVIII. IMPEDIMENTS

A. Retraining a Trace chemist who has been on sick leave for an

extended period and the uncertainty of the extent of the retraining period.

B. ISO requirements did create additional paperwork for personnel. As

ISO is an ongoing “a live” process, continued modifications take up resources.

C. The Trace Chemistry backlog in hair cases was reviewed in 2007,

some requests were eliminated. Hiring in late 2007 a part time trace chemist greatly helped training a second chemist as an analyst in hair.

D. Loss of trained forensic science personnel.

E. Meetings and cooperative projects with the ISP take time and

resources.

I-MCFSA Chemistry Unit

Analytical

Process

Trace Chemistry Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) Blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is the concentration of alcohol in a person's blood. BAC is

most commonly used as a measure of intoxication for legal or medical purposes. It is measured

in terms of mass per volume. The lab uses a process known as gas chromatography. Gas

chromatography is essentially a function of time and temperature. In running the test, the

sample is first mixed with an internal standards, t-butanol.

The information presented is for an uncomplicated case.

Cost

Time

Based on a

labor cost of

$34.60/hr

Evidence

Transportation

From the IMPD property room to lab; return to IMPD; intra-lab transportation Total time……………0.5 hour $17.30

Evidence handling Justice-Trax search, ordering evidence from IMPD, initialing evidence, opening evidence,

unpacking and repackaging evidence, evidence taping, photocopying the evidence, laying out evidence, cleaning work area to prevent biohazard contamination

Total time……………0.5 hour

$17.30

Evidence testing Processing the evidence diluting the blood, preparing plasma sample, instrument startup,

evaluation of data. Once the blood is diluted with an internal standard, it is analyzed a gas

chromatograph.

Total time……………1.50 hours

$51.90

Preparing Standards

and Reagents

Total time……………0.25 hour $8.65

Writing Lab Notes Total time……………0.50 hour $17.30

LIMS Data Entry Total time……………0.25 hour $8.65

Supplies

Chemicals EtOH, t-BuOH, Compressed Air, Compressed Nitrogen, Cerilliant EtOH Control, bleach (5mL) $9.50

Stationary 1 request card, 1 BAC analysis form, 1 draft-copy of lab report, 10 sheets of data from the GC

printer (inkjet cartridge), 5 pages of method, photocopies of the evidence $3.50

Evidence sealing

tape

1 ft. (~ 0.04/ FT) $0.04

Evidence

packaging

1 biohazard sticker, 1 plastic bag $0.17

Consumables Gloves (4 pair), disposable apron, Kimwipes, pipette tips, GC vials, $10.00

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunkenness

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volume

Equipment

Hand tools Pipettors (Value $200) (life ~20 years) $200 20 = $10 600 BAC cases/year = $0.01 $0.01

Microscope NA

Balance Value $3000.00 (life 15 years) $200 600 BAC/year = $0.33 $0.33

UV

Spectrophotometer

NA

FTIR

Spectrophotometer

NA

GC/MS Gas

chromatograph/Mass

spectrograph

NA

GC/FID GC / FID value ~ $25,000.00 (life ~10 years)

Yearly maintenance ~ $100.00 $100.00 600 cases/year = $0.16

Total Value of GC/FID $25,000 10 =$2,500.00 600 cases/year =$4.16

$4.32

Refrigerator Value ` $400.00 (15 year life) $400 15 = $26.66 $26.66 600 cases/year = $0.04 $0.04

Oven NA

Centrifuge

TLC Thin Layer

Chromatography

NA

Ink-jet Printer NA part of GC

Heat Sealer Value $100 (life ~5 years) $20 600 = $0.03 $0.03

Hydrogen Generator

Gas Regulators $300.00 (30 year life) $300.00 30 = $10.00 $10.00 600 = $ 0.01 $0.01

UV Light

Viewing-Box

TOTAL COST PER CASE $149.02


Analytical

Process

Drug Chemistry Cocaine Controlled substance analysis involves the qualitative examination of suspected solid dose drug

evidence to determine if the material does in fact contain a controlled substance. The most common

substances analyzed at the laboratory are marijuana and cocaine. Cocaine is a Schedule II drug under

the Controlled Substances Act. Analysts in the Drug Chemistry section use state-of-the-art scientific

methodology and instrumentation to positively confirm the presence of controlled substances. These

techniques include ultraviolet spectroscopy, thin-layer chromatography, gas chromatography, mass

spectrometry and infrared spectroscopy

The information presented is for a uncomplicated case.

Cost

Time

Based on a

labor cost of

$34.60/hr

Evidence

Transportation

From the IMPD property room to lab; return to IMPD; intra-lab transportation


Evidence handling Initialing evidence, opening evidence, unpacking and repackaging evidence, evidence taping, ,

laying out evidence, cleaning work area to prevent cross contamination


Evidence testing Processing the evidence: weighing the sample, reagent color testing, instrument startup,

evaluation of data.

Total time……………1.00 hours $34.60

Preparing standards

and reagents

Preparing CoSCN reagent, Cocaine GC/MS standard solution ~ 5 hr/year

$173.00/year 3000cases/year = $0.05 $0.05

Writing Lab Notes Proper documentation of: evidence manipulation, evidence testing, all observations and all

opinions generated, printing data from the GC/MS, evaluating and interpreting data



Supplies

Chemicals Petroleum Ether, HCl, Cobalt Thiocyanate, Methanol, Chloroform

Stationary 1 Drug analysis form, 1 case envelope, 1 draft-copy of lab report, 1 reagent sheet, 4 sheets

GC/MS data, 1 result fax, 1 lab note sheet,

Evidence sealing tape 1 ft ($0.04/ ft) $0.04

Evidence packaging Plastic bags, tape $0.15

Drug standards Cocaine 10 gram bottle $1, 300.00 ~ 1 gram a year consumed for 2000 cocaine cases $0.06

Consumables Gloves (1 pair), brown paper for counter (2ft), Kimwipes, 1 glass test tube, weigh boat, GC/MS

sample vials $2.00

Equipment

Hand tools Metal probes, surgical scalpel (dispo-blades), Spatula, Scissors

Total value of these tools $13.00 replaced biannually ~6000 marijuana cases in 2 years < $0.01

Microscope

Balance 11 balances Total value $33,000.00 (life 15 years) $2,200 5,500 cases weighed/year = $0.40

$0.40

UV

Spectrophotometer

3 UV’s total value $20,000.00 X 3 = $60,000 (life ~ 15 years)

~ 3000 cases per year have samples that are processed on the UV

Yearly maintenance ~ $100.00 $300 3000 cases/year = $0.10

Total Value of UV’s $60,000 8 =$7,500.00 3000 cases/year = $2.50

$2.60

FTIR

Spectrophotometer

GC/MS Gas

chromatograph/Mass

spectrograph

3 GC/MS’s total value $50,000.00 X 3 = $150,000 (life ~8 years)

~ 3000 cases per year have samples that are processed on the GC/MS

Yearly maintenance ~ $6000.00 $6000 3000 cases/year = $2.00

Total Value of GC/MS’s $150,000 8 =$18,750.00 3000 cases/year = $6.25

$8.25

GC/FID

Refrigerator

Oven

Centrifuge

TLC Thin Layer

Chromatography

Laser-jet Printer Part of the GC/MS

Heat Sealer 7 heat sealers Total value $700 (life ~5 years) $140 2000 cases/year = $0.07

Hydrogen Generator

Gas Regulators $300.00 (30 year life) $300.00 30 = $10.00 $10.00 3000 = < $0.01 < $0.01

UV Light

Viewing-Box



Analytical

Process

Drug Chemistry Marijuana Controlled substance analysis typically involves the qualitative examination of suspected solid

dose drug evidence to determine if the material does in fact contain a controlled substance, and

if so to identify that substance to the exclusion of all others. Leaf marijuana exhibits tend to

have characteristics that are visually recognizable. A microscopic examination coupled with

the Duquenois-Levine chemical test, provides a basis for the identification of leaf marijuana.

The most common substances analyzed at the laboratory are marijuana and cocaine

The information presented is for an uncomplicated case.

Cost

Time

Based on a

labor cost of

$34.60/hr

Evidence

Transportation

From the IMPD property room to lab; return to IMPD; intra-lab transportation


Evidence handling Initialing evidence, opening evidence, unpacking and repackaging evidence, evidence taping, ,

laying out evidence, cleaning work area to prevent cross contamination


Evidence testing Processing the evidence: weighing the sample, reagent color testing, microscopic examination

Total time……………0..25 hours $8.65

Preparing Standards

and Reagents

Preparing Duquenois and daily checking ~ 9.5 hr/year 9.5 X $34.60 = $328.70/year

$328.70/year 3000cases/year = $0.10 $0.10

Writing Lab Notes Proper documentation of: evidence manipulation, evidence testing, all observations and all

opinions generated



Supplies

Chemicals Petroleum Ether, Vanillin, HCl, Chloroform, Acetaldehyde, Ethanol $0.35

Stationary 1 Drug analysis form, 1 case envelope, 1 draft-copy of lab report, 1 reagent sheet, 1 result fax, 1

lab note sheet $0.60

Evidence Sealing

Tape

1 ft ($0.04/ ft) $0.04

Evidence packaging Plastic bags, tape $0.15

Drug Standards 6 vials of Cerilliant std / year = $150.00 $150.00 3000 = $0.05 $0.05

Consumables Gloves (1 pair), brown paper for counter (2ft), Kimwipes, 1 glass test tube, weigh boat $1.29

Equipment

Hand tools Metal probes, surgical scalpel (dispo-blades), Spatula, Scissors

Total value of these tools $13.00 replaced biannually ~4000 cocaine cases in 2 years <$0.01

Microscope 6 Stereomicroscopes Total value ~$18,000 (life 15 years)

Total value of the microscope $18,000 15=$1,200 $1,200 3000 cases/year =$0.40 light source replacement annually ($3.00)

$0.40

Balance 11 balances Total value $33,000.00 (life 15 years) $2,200 5,500 cases weighed/year = $0.40 $0.40

UV

Spectrophotometer

NA

FTIR

Spectrophotometer

NA

GC/MS Gas

chromatograph/Mass

spectrograph

NA

GC/FID NA

Refrigerator NA

Oven NA

Centrifuge NA

TLC Thin Layer

Chromatography

NA

Ink-jet Printer NA

Heat Sealer 7 heat sealers Total value $700 (life ~5 years) $140 3000 cases/year = $0.04

Hydrogen Generator NA

Gas Regulators NA

UV Light

Viewing-Box

NA


Indianapolis-Marion County Forensic Services Agency

PROPOSAL FOR FORENSIC SUPPORT

IN REGIONAL COUNTIES

He who does not prevent a crime when he can, encourages it.” Seneca,Roman philosopher, mid-1st century AD

http://en.thinkexist.com/quotation/he_who_does_not_prevent_a_crime_when_he_can/214105.html

Forensic Casework Proposal

For Regional Counties

Background: The I-MCFSA has the responsibility of providing quality forensic services

to all law enforcement agencies within the boundaries of Marion County. All other

Indiana counties receive forensic services from the Indiana State Police lab system. A

large backlog of cases exists within the Indiana State Police Laboratory system. Regional

counties have contacted the I-MCFSA about doing casework in the past for a fee and

based on recent requests they are still willing to pay for forensic casework. These

requests are oftentimes driven by drug forfeiture monies or prosecutors deferment funds.

The procedures outlined below would allow the I-MCFSA to assist these counties in

certain forensic disciplines, on a cost basis, with no degradation to the services provided

to the Marion County law enforcement community and at no cost to our taxpayers.

Strengths: The I-MCFSA has equipment, personnel and space that can handle a slight

increase in workload in several selected disciplines.

Weaknesses: Coordination up front will be needed with each potential customer to

explain this program, seek agreement on pricing and to coordinate how cases are referred

and accepted by this agency.

Opportunities: This agency, by entering into a partnership with the outlying counties,

will receive a revenue source that can be turned around and used to fund overtime hours

so that additional Marion County casework can be worked in those sections that have

unacceptable backlogged cases. Drug forfeiture monies will be targeted as a funding

source for these “regional” counties; thereby, benefiting programs already aimed at

reducing crime rates in the central Indiana region.

PROCEDURES

Memorandum of Understanding: Initially, the customer (law enforcement agency or

Prosecutors Office) of the supported counties would enter into a Memorandum of

Understanding with the I-MCFSA. This MOU would cover, at a minimum, price

schedule, payment instructions; I-MCFSA has the final say on which cases are accepted;

a statement that Marion County casework has precedence, and testimony notification

procedures and expected turnaround timeframes. Once the MOU is complete, then

requests for forensic support may be executed.

Case Acceptance: The Laboratory Director or Deputy Director will accept the case

based on current backlogs in the affected discipline and availability of staffing to

accomplish the request in a timely manner.

Charges: Individuals working the case will record and track time spent on the case for

billing purposes. Time spent working the case as well as providing testimony will be

charged to the customers. Forensic scientists will also record all consumable supplies

used in the analytical work. The costs of these supplies will be transferred to the client.

These records will be forwarded to the Operations Manager so that the customer can be

invoiced properly.

I-MCFSA Impact: In most cases, work accomplished for the external counties will be

done after normal work hours in overtime status. This will ensure that Marion County

caseloads receive first priority.

Use of Funds: Revenue generated from this program would first be used to pay the

overtime wages accrued by our staff to work their cases. No costs to Marion County

would occur and as monies accumulate in the dedicated account, we would the additional

monies to fund additional overtime those areas where we are experiencing our greatest

needs. This allows overtime hours to be worked in the I-MCFSA, which without this

program, could not be funded.

(NOTE: Revenue generated by this fund will be very unpredictable at first and require

experience with the “regional counties” to estimate potential revenues. This revenue

could be affected by various uncontrollable issues such as, a reduction in crime or law

enforcement efforts, etc. which would limit case submissions. Therefore, this revenue

should not be counted on to provide a steady cash flow in the short term.)

Accounting: A non-reverting special revenue fund would be established to track all

funds received and expended related to this project. This would allow strict

accountability of these funds as well as allow the I-MCFSA use of these funds on a

continual basis. This fund would be included in the annual budget cycle with

appropriations approved by the City-County Council. Expenses can not be charged to

this fund without appropriate fund balance and/or approved appropriations.

FEE SCHEDULE

Hourly rate for analytical work and testimony: $95.00 per hour

(Includes travel time for testimony)

Consumables: actual cost or ($20.00 minimum)

Documentation/Administrative fee $25.00

(includes billing, accounts receivable and postage)

2007 Case Submissions

Submitting Agency

Number of

Submitted

Cases

Airport Police Department Count 6

Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Count 10

Beech Grove Fire Department Count 1

Beech Grove Police Department Count 134

Butler University Police Department Count 8

Cumberland Police Department Count 23

Decatur Township School Police Count 1

Dept. of Veteran Affairs Count 4

Elizabethtown Police Department Count 1

Forensic Pathology Count 1

Franklin Police Dept. Count 1

Greenwod Police Department Count 2

IMCFSA-IMCFSA Count 1

IMPD Property Room Count 2

Indiana State Excise Police Count 1

Indianapolis Division - Indiana University Police Department Count 27

Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department Count 8640

Indianapolis Police Department Count 13

Indianapolis Public School Police Count 13

IUPUIPD-0 Count 1

IUPUIPD-IUPUIPD Count 4

Lawrence Police Department Count 440

Marion County Coroner's Office Count 52

Marion County Prosecutor's Office Count 95

Marion County Sheriff's Department Count 21

Pike Township Constables Office Count 2

Plainfield Police Department Count 1

Public Defenders Office Count 1

Speedway Police Department Count 290

SSA-SSA Count 3

United States Attorney Count 1

United States Secret Service Count 8

Warren Township Constable Count 1

Warren Township School Police Count 1

Grand Count 9810

2008 Case Submissions

Submitting Agency

Number of

Submitted

Cases

Airport Police Department Count 9

Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Count 8

ATF-ATF Count 2

Beech Grove Police Department Count 125

Butler University Police Department Count 5

Clermont Police Department Count 3

CLERMONT-CLERMONT Count 1

Cumberland Police Department Count 54

FBI-FBI-INDY Count 1

Federal Bureau of Investigations Count 1

Frankfort Police Department Count 1

Indiana State Police - District 52 Count 4

Indianapolis Division - Indiana University Police Department Count 18

Indianapolis Housing Police Count 2

Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department Count 8344

Indianapolis Police Department Count 1

Indianapolis Public School Police Count 20

Indianapolis-Marion County Forensic Services Agency Count 1

IUPUIPD-0 Count 2

Lawrence Police Department Count 534

Marian College Police Dept. Count 6

Marion County Coroner's Office Count 9

Marion County Court System Count 1

Marion County Prosecutor's Office Count 104

Marion County Sheriff's Department Count 2

Montgomery County Prosecutors Office Count 1

Noblesville Police Dept Count 1

Perry Township School Police Count 2

Postal Inspection Service Count 2

Speedway Police Department Count 251

SSA-SSA Count 2

U. S. Dept. of Defense Count 1

United States Secret Service Count 3

University of Indianapolis Police Department Count 1

Warren Township School Police Count 1

Grand Count 9523

1

Date: November 25, 2008

To: Michael Medler, Director of Forensic Services

From: Michael Huber and Kristen Tusing, Office of Enterprise Development

Re: Follow-up to Forensic Services IndyStat Meeting held November 25, 2008

Cc: Mayor Greg Ballard Paul Okeson, Chief of Staff

David Reynolds, Controller

Chris Cotterill, Corporation Counsel Sarah Taylor, Constituent Services

Kevin Ortell, Interim Chief Information Officer

Turn Around Time Data

Follow-up Action. Provide turn around data to reflect that previous two months to clarify data

set.

Provide recommendations on ways to measure year-over-year improvement within Forensic

Services Agency.

Turn Around Time Barriers

Follow-up Action. Provide recommendations to help with barriers to turn around time that were identified and discussed in the November meeting.

Entities Utilizing Service

Follow-up Action. Do the excluded cities pay for services? What is the estimated value of the

service provided to outside entities?

False Alarms or Frivolous Requests

Follow-up Action. Provide recommendations on how the City can prevent “false alarms” or requests of Forensic Services Agency that are not necessary. (Given the demands on Forensic

Services Agency including its increasing caseloads, it is necessary that the City do all it can to

ensure that requests are absolutely necessary.)

Indy Stat Accountability in Action for the City of Indianapolis