How Should Communities Pay for Forensic Lab Services?
by Moderator on Jan.05, 2010, under Topics for discussion
The present budget climate has hit forensic labs hard. In some regions, there is discussion about charging for what historically have been free services. Various payment models are being considered, from a per capita fee based on population or simply recovering actual costs to establishing hourly rates for different types of cases. The UK as well as other areas have used fee-for-service models for a number of years. Some contend that the practice works while others argue that it causes many unanticipated problems.
What is your view of the practice?
January 8th, 2010 on 8:29 am
In Portugal all the forensic expertise’s made by the National Institute of Forensic Medicine (INML) and by the Lab of Scientific Police are paid, even when demanded by court. There is a price list, approved by the Ministry of Justice, with the prices of all the different forensic exams. At the final of the process the costs of the forensic examinations enter as costs of the judicial process and the convicted person or entity as to pay for them. If there is no one convicted or if the convicted person as no money, than the state (the Ministry of Justice) will support the expenses, but like this the state recovers more or less 70% of the money invested in forensic examinations. The INML receives no budget from the state and lives only from the money he generates with the expertises that he does and with the teaching and research that he promotes. The INML does not only work for courts but, by law, can also do expertise´s for private persons and private institutions and entities.
The system is working like this since 2000, and the results are very positive and encouraging.
January 9th, 2010 on 8:02 am
Readers may wish to know that Professor Duarte Nuno Vieira is president of the International Association of Forensic Sciences and will host the 19th meeting of the IAFS in Funchal, Madeira 12-17 September 2011. Mark your calendars!
January 13th, 2010 on 8:51 pm
I am not convinced about the value of fee for service models for forensic science. Mostly laboratories service a relatively small number of clients often only a single one such as a police agency. Fee for service creates complexity with charging mechanisms (unit costs etc) and is often only a different way of allocating insufficient funding. It is now provided to the user instead of the laboratory from the same central source. The direction is often one of the user trying to drive the price of services down.
I do however think that laboratories can provide fee for service function for specific non core clients (eg private lawyers or other justice sytem participants. A system of recurrent funding for core major clients and fee for service for occasional users.
The major isssue is appropriate funding for forensic science. No matter what the system unless adequate resources are provided the problems that are continually appearing, such as high backlogs, will not go away. Forensic scientists are criticised for failings that are the result of inadequate funding. it should be the responsibility of governments to properly fund forensic science.
January 14th, 2010 on 10:11 pm
I am in agreement with Hilton Kobus on this issue. In my view, it is essential that some services are provided by Government and forensic science is one of those. The common argument to justify fee for sevice is that it limits overservicing by the provider and unreasonable requests from the user.
The counter argument is that where there is a fee for service system, judgements about the analyses requested are based on cost rather than science.
The days of an investigator coming to a laboratory with an armful of bagged items and a request to ‘forensic these’ are, or should be long gone and there are a number of checks and balances that can be implemented to limit overservicing without the introduction of fee for service.