078 17 CCC April 2017 08 Transforming Forensics Business Case March 2017

OFFICIAL

TF OBC - v1.1.docx PAGE 1 OF 129 31st March 2017

Outline Business Case 31st March 2017

OFFICIAL


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction

Page 3

Executive Summary

Page 4

Strategic Case

Introduction

Page 7

Present Position

Page 8

Options for

transformation

Page 12

Evaluating the options

Page 14

Realising the benefits

Page 16

Economic Case Introduction

Page 19

Option Definition

Page 17

Quantitative

Assessment

Page 36

Quantitative

Assessment

Page 59

Commercial

Considerations

Page 62

Summary

Page 65

Financial Case Introduction

Page 66

Summary

Page 70

Commercial Case Introduction

Page 71

Strategic Context

Page 72

Business & Service

Requirements

Page 74

Category Management

Page 79

Management Case Introduction

Page 83

Delivering Option 5

Page 86

Appendix Appendix A –

Strategic Case

Page 93

Appendix B –

Economic Case

Page 93

Appendix C –

Financial Case

Page 110

Appendix D –

Commercial Case

Page 111

Appendix E –

Management Case

Page 124

Acronyms

Page 128

OFFICIAL


INTRODUCTION

The Transforming Forensics project has been

charged by the NPCC Forensics Portfolio Board

with “investigating the possible transformation of

the delivery of forensic services using an

evidence-based approach, by developing options

and making recommendations that lead to a more

effective, efficient and economic model, thereby

delivering enhanced public safety and public

confidence”.

The scope of the Transforming Forensics project

was agreed from an early stage to include

physical and digital forensics, but to exclude

digital investigations and intelligence, and

communications intelligence.

The purpose of this Outline Business Case is to

help identify a preferred option for transforming

forensic service provision for police forces in

England and Wales, PSNI, BTP and NCA. It sets

out the rationale and goals for transformational

change, explains the options available, and sets

out a structured quantitative and qualitative

evaluation, leading to the identification of a

preferred option. The financial case supporting

the preferred option is then outlined, together with

an analysis of the commercial considerations that

will need to be resolved. Finally, the business

case describes how the preferred option can be

progressed.

The conclusions reached in the business case are

supported by comprehensive data collection and

analysis work covering forensic service provision

in 23 forces.

It is important to note that the Outline Business

Case is intended as the basis for making a

decision. It is not a blueprint for the future service,

and further appraisal of the selected option should

be carried out in the subsequent Full Business

Case.

Also, the level of transformational change

involved varies between options. Transformational

change is expected to be an essential attribute in

order to access financial support from the Police

Reform and Transformation Fund (PRTF), and will

therefore affect the overall affordability of each

option.

The OBC has been authored in accordance with

the HM Treasury Green Book guidance1 and

guidance on Public Sector Business Cases using

the Five Case Model2.

1https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/

uploads/attachment_data/file/220541/green_book_complete.pdf 2https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/

uploads/attachment_data/file/469317/green_book_guidance_public_sector_business_cases_2015_update.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/220541/green_book_complete.pdf



https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/469317/green_book_guidance_public_sector_business_cases_2015_update.pdf




OFFICIAL


This business case proposes the delivery of a

fully integrated forensic service that will better

support policing and the wider Criminal Justice

System (CJS), and adapt more readily to future

needs whilst releasing resources for re-

investment.

THE NEED FOR CHANGE

Patterns of crime are changing. Reductions in

some crime types are being offset by new types of

crime and crimes committed in new ways,

especially with the increasing prevalence of digital

technologies. Some crimes, such as fraud and

child sexual exploitation, increasingly occur

across multiple force borders, further complicating

the traditional forensic picture. As a result, while

the use of traditional forensics is declining,

demand for digital forensic support continues to

grow exponentially.

Meeting forensic needs is therefore difficult and

will grow more so. Many forces already

collaborate to improve services and realise

savings, and most are also pursuing programmes

to develop and deploy improved digital forensics

capabilities. Although collaborative approaches

deliver substantial benefits, they cannot address

all new demands and still deliver the cost savings

that forces need to achieve.

The challenge facing Chief Officers and Police

and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) is how to

reform forensic service delivery in a way that

significantly enhances the support provided to

individual forces while establishing a strong

platform to meet future needs and also freeing

resources. This echoes the challenge posed to

PCCs by the Home Secretary in May 2016.

The resulting vision set by the NPCC for forensic

services is therefore to deliver high quality,

specialist forensic capabilities that support the

2025 policing vision to rapidly protect

communities and the vulnerable, and which are

sustainable to meet future threats and demand.

Forensic service delivery cannot meet this goal by

continuing on its current trajectory. Instead, there

is a need for transformational change.

SERVICE TRANSFORMATION

The project team has explored options for future

forensic service delivery. These range from

making the minimum changes necessitated by the

updated biometric matching systems currently

being developed, to comprehensive service

transformation involving new ways of working and

the consolidation of capabilities to deliver a fully

integrated service to forces.

The analysis completed for this business case

has determined that the consolidation of forensic

activities to establish a unified service supporting

local delivery represents the most compelling

option.

This recommendation has been developed

through detailed service modelling and

cost/benefit evaluation, completed with input from

forensic leaders in policing and specialist support

from the Home Office. This conclusion is

supported by qualitative assessments completed

by forensic leaders across policing, and by

independent analysis of the financial and

commercial implications of each option.

The recommended future model will build on

current strengths in delivering high quality forensic

services to establish a single, national, unified

service for the direction and delivery of forensic

Executive Summary

OFFICIAL


activities. This will simplify governance

arrangements and introduce aggregated

capabilities operating in a consistent way to

appropriate quality standards. Overall direction,

market engagement and ways of working will be

set at national level, with aggregated ‘back-end’

processing activities supported by a common

logistics network. By managing and delivering

services at appropriate levels, from national to

local, the service will provide local flexibility and

responsiveness. The envisaged forensic service

would also have influence across the whole

forensic supply chain, including locally-based

scene investigation services, and would influence

research and development as well as the

commercial and partnership approaches taken to

procure service and supplies. The scope of the

proposed forensic service would include all

physical and digital forensics, but exclude digital

investigations and intelligence, and


A comprehensive data collection and analysis

programme underpins this conclusion. Detailed

information on forensic services’ performance and

costs has been obtained relating to twenty three

forces. This data set has been described as

representing the most thorough, robust and

insightful analysis of forensic delivery costs and

efficiencies undertaken to date, and provides a

solid foundation for the business case’s

conclusions.

The data obtained indicates that forces in

England, Wales and Northern Ireland (including

British Transport Police (BTP) and the National

Crime Agency (NCA)) currently spend of the order

of £370M annually on forensic services. It has

been conservatively estimated that there is scope

to reduce this to an annual spend of £212M in ten

years time.

…consolidation of forensic activities to

establish a unified service supporting local

delivery represents the most compelling

option.

BENEFITS TO POLICING

Service transformation offers the prospect to build

on existing strengths and exploit new

opportunities to create a forensic capability that

will meet the future needs of police and other

stakeholders in an effective, efficient and

sustainable way. It will do this by:

Delivering better outcomes – Transformation

will identify and embed best practice, deliver

consistent outcomes, and adopt and deliver

the highest standards, thereby providing

support to the safeguarding and public

protection mission of policing and the wider

CJS.

Building capability for the future –

Transformation will lead to more resilient,

sustainable, flexible, coherently organised

services capable of adapting to local, regional

and national challenges, and new and

emerging threats.

Supporting re-investment in priority areas –

Transformation will enable the delivery of more

efficient services, reduce accreditation costs

and optimise procurement opportunities to

release resources for reinvestment in other

policing priorities.

Enabling wider reform – Within the context of

the wider police reform programme, forensic

transformation represents one of the first

tangible steps towards planned wider police

transformation. Although it is not without its

challenges, as a first step it is arguably

relatively straightforward, and can pave the

way to the more profound reforms that the

NPCC and APCC are currently exploring.

The proposed solution aligns with and supports

other strategic initiatives, including the Home

Office Biometrics (HOB) programme, the Digital

Policing Portfolio and the National Law

Enforcement Data (NLED) programme.

In her annual report published in January 2017,

the Forensic Science Regulator stated “the quality

management systems employed are reaching

their capacity limits. It is clear that the single

biggest challenge … is financial: the costs

associated with complying with and being

assessed against the standards”. The proposed

unified approach to quality standards and

accreditation, together with a common input to

legislative developments, will help address this

concern by reducing costs and improving the

fitness for purpose of future policy impacting

forensics and biometrics.

OFFICIAL


The recommended solution will also allow policing

as a whole to more effectively steer and support

research and development in forensic

technologies, and help sustain a healthy and

effective forensic supplier marketplace – both of

which were set as objectives by the House of

Commons Science and Technology Committee in

late 2016.

RECOGNISING STAKEHOLDERS’ CONCERNS

Although the case for transforming forensic

services is compelling, it is recognised that some

PCCs, Chief Officers and members of the forensic

science community, as well as other stakeholders,

will have legitimate concerns over the potential

changes proposed.

Some have expressed concern that there will be

winners and losers in terms of service levels

received and responsiveness to local needs, with

larger, metropolitan forces potentially dominating

service planning and delivery. Initial service

design work and an understanding of how other

organisations approach this question suggest

that, in practice, improvements in services both at

a local level and a national level can be delivered.

Also, the scale of business and technology

change required to implement the recommended

solution may appear daunting and, at least

initially, to involve significant risks. In addition,

existing contractual commitments may constrain

forces’ ability to migrate to a new operating model

and technology base. Drawing on business

change experience in policing and more widely,

the recommended solution has been designed so

that it can be implemented progressively. It will

build on proven solutions, via Proof of Concept

(PoC) projects, and offer opportunities for

continuing refinement as the programme

progresses, in order to sustain a clear focus on

both achieving the end goals and continuing to

deliver high quality forensic services during the

transformation.

These are valid concerns at this time and will be

addressed in the Full Business Case.

Conservative cost/benefit modelling confirms that

it will not be essential for all forces to commit to

participating in the new service model. The Full

Business Case for the programme will confirm the

critical level of participation needed for success. It

is anticipated, however, that forces choosing to

participate from the commencement of the

change programme will benefit from

transformation funding to support the necessary

business and technology changes.

It should be noted that this is not a reinvention of

the Forensic Science Service (FSS); the proposed

solution differs in purpose and scope. The police

service has done much to establish itself as an

intelligent customer of forensic science services,

which has served to drive down cost and improve

quality. Building on previous work, the proposed

service will develop further the commercial

marketplace and build stronger, closer and more

strategic long term relationships with private

sector suppliers, industry and academia, ensuring

the provision of the high quality forensic services

needed by modern policing and helping re-

establish the UK as a world-leader in forensic

sciences.

COMMITTING TO CHANGE

The potential benefits of Transforming Forensics

are substantial. Realisation of this vision will

require leadership, commitment and a willingness

to tackle large and complex questions about the

future shape of forensic and biometric services.

The prospect of transforming police forensic

services as proposed is unprecedented, and has

been described by one Chief Constable as a

‘once in a lifetime’ opportunity. The NPCC and

APCC are therefore asked to review and approve

the conclusions reached in this Outline Business

Case, and to support progression to a Full

Business Case with a view to the development of

a bid to the PRTF in support of full

implementation.

Realisation of this vision will require

leadership, commitment and a willingness to

tackle large and complex questions about the

future shape of forensic and biometric

services.

OFFICIAL


INTRODUCTION

This Strategic Case sets out the rationale for

transforming how forensic services are organised,

procured and delivered to support police forces, in

England, Wales and Northern Ireland (including

NCA and BTP), and other users of forensic

services. Its scope includes physical and digital

forensics, but excludes digital investigations and

intelligence, and communications intelligence.

Although crime patterns are changing and

creating new demands on forces, there are also

opportunities to adopt improved technologies and

modernise ways of working. These can help

forces achieve an enhanced intelligence picture;

deliver improved value for money; support better,

speedier justice; and respond effectively to

changing future needs.

The “prize” is significant: faster local response

times to crimes and the opportunity for the earlier

apprehension of those committing both volume

and serious crime will result in better services for

victims and the vulnerable, which will ultimately

increase confidence in local policing.

Embracing transformational change will also help

secure financial support, through the PRTF.

Furthermore, savings realised through the

programme will enable Chief Constables and

Police and Crime Commissioners to redirect

resources towards other force priorities.

The scale of the challenge should not be

underestimated. While many forces have made

significant advances, acting either alone or in

collaboration, the required scale and scope of

forensic service transformation involves more

fundamental change than can be delivered

through collaborations and local initiatives.

This Strategic Case highlights the drivers for

change, outlines the nature of the

transformational change that is needed,

references the views of senior stakeholders in

policing, and explains how alternative future

models have been developed for assessment,

leading to recommendations for the future shape

of forensic services.

Police forces thus face a number of

challenges which together mean that the

current model of forensic service delivery will

not be capable of supporting the future

mission of policing.

Strategic Case

OFFICIAL


PRESENT POSITION

Forensic services are a major tool in police forces’

work to combat crime and meet the expectations

of local communities.

Police forces in England and Wales are

individually responsible for the procurement and

delivery of the forensic services they require. In

most cases, this is achieved through a mixed

economy of in-force capabilities and the use of

private sector Forensic Service Providers (FSPs).

The latter provide a wide range of services, from

higher volume ‘routine’ services, such as DNA

profiling, to more specialist lower-volume

services, such as ballistics examination. Forces

also access a range of national services, such as

the IDENT1 fingerprint services and the National

DNA Database.

In recent years, several forces have agreed to

pool their forensic service procurement and

delivery capabilities, and the majority now

collaborate to varying degrees in groups of

between two and seven forces to deliver forensic

services. These collaborations have been able

deliver forensic services at a greater scale, with

shared resources and capabilities, leading to

reduced costs through increased purchasing

power and resource sharing. Significantly,

collaboration has also allowed participating forces

to exploit some newly emergent or more specialist

forensic technologies and ways of working on a

local basis. This has typically encompassed both

physical and digital forensics, together with crime

scene work in many areas.

Forces use a variety of case management

systems to support their investigations and

forensic analysis tracking. Collaborations are

typically migrating to single case management

solutions, although the range of solutions

currently used and the need for compatibility with

individual forces’ core crime and property systems

mean that moving to a common solution remains

difficult. Significantly, given the need to meet

current demand trends, there is not yet an agreed

common solution to support digital forensic case

management.

Forensic services are subject to regulatory

oversight, with the government-appointed

Forensic Science Regulator (FSR) and the

Biometrics Commissioner playing significant roles

in ensuring legal compliance and fitness-for-

purpose. Linked to this, forensic service delivery

is subject to rigorous quality assurance, with

forces devoting significant and increasing

resources to meeting accreditation requirements

for both physical and digital forensics.

The financial cost of forensic activity is

considerable. Based on available information,

latest estimates compiled to support this Outline

Business Case suggest that the total cost of

forensic services in England, Wales and Northern

Ireland (including BTP and the NCA) is of the

order £370M per annum.

FORENSICS

2015/16

480,819£280MILLION

£53MILLION

415,300

£80

DIGITAL FORENSICS

CRIME

SCENES

ATTENDED

SPENT ON

TRADITIONAL

FORENSICS

MILLION

SPENT ON FORENSIC

SERVICE PROVIDERS

£8.5MILLION ON R&D

FINGERPRINTS

FROM SCENES

Figure 1: Current forensic spending

OFFICIAL


This is a conservative estimate: the annual figure

includes core forensics staff and services, but

excludes non-recharged resources such as IT

hardware and, in many cases, premises. Within

the total figure, approximately £80M is accounted

for by spending on external forensic services. The

basis for these estimates is provided in our cost

model. The growth is expanding considerably with

the increase in digital criminal activity and

developing technology which is conservatively

estimated at approximately 29% year on year.

DRIVERS FOR CHANGE

There is growing recognition across policing that

current ways of working and advancing forensic

services will struggle to meet future needs in an

affordable and effective manner. Several factors

are driving this:

Force priorities and public expectations

continue to evolve. Recently published PCC

and force plans stress the need to protect the

vulnerable and support victims of crime, and

the Policing Vision 2025 plan highlighted the

need for transformation and better use of

resources to “provide an effective, accessible

and value for money service that can be

trusted.” Evolving public expectations together

with greater local accountability mean that

forces need to address these challenges

effectively, which will frequently demand new

forensic capabilities.

Demand for forensic services is changing.

Acquisitive crime has declined, but this has

been offset by a significant rise in digitally

enabled crime, often carried out on a cross-

boundary or international basis. Concurrently,

there is now also a digital element to more

traditional crime. The net effect is that, while

demand for ‘traditional’ forensics is projected

to decline, this trend will be partly offset by

rising demand in ‘new’ areas. Analysis by the

Home Office predicts a decline of around 9%

in total submission volumes from 2015/16 to

2019/20; this comprises two opposing trends –

a decrease of 16% in traditional forensics

volumes and an increase of 116% in the

number of digital devices examined.

Digital forensic technologies and their

deployment continue to evolve rapidly. This is

essential in order to respond to advances

made by perpetrators of digital and digitally-

enabled crimes, including the adoption of new

technologies. These include high priority

threats, such as Child Sexual Exploitation

(CSE), organised immigration crime and fraud,

which collectively target the most vulnerable in

society. To date, several forces have made

significant advances in this area, including the

development of technologies and structured

forensic evaluation processes. This has

frequently been achieved through the re-

allocation of underspends from other activities,

but the pace of change means that, for most

forces, it will be difficult and costly to remain

close to the forefront of developments.

Current biometric matching capabilities are

scheduled to be updated. The HOB

programme will deliver improved fingerprint

matching, automated DNA matching and

potentially new facial recognition capabilities

over the next 3-4 years. These will require new

business processes to be implemented in

forces’ forensic units in order to be able to

exploit these new capabilities.

Forensic services need to be readily adaptable

to meet future needs, but the current delivery

model remains fragmented and cannot readily

support wider policing reform or cross-

boundary working. In specialist capabilities, for

example, the concepts of ‘networked policing’

and establishment of national specialist

capabilities are currently being considered,

which will require a more integrated and

flexible delivery model than is currently in

place.

Current arrangements do not optimise the

efficient use of high cost resources. Forces

and collaborations purchase equipment and

services principally for their own use, which

means that high cost equipment and premises

will often not be used to their full capacity.

Although some forces do share across

boundaries, there are no nationally agreed

mechanisms for this or for planning and

managing the utilisation of such capabilities.

Forensic service providers and equipment

manufacturers are continuing to develop

promising new forensic technologies, but the

market for these remains fragmented and

therefore may be unattractive to some

potential entrants. Some of these technologies

offer possibilities for more rapid at-scene

processing of traditional forensic samples so

that, if integrated with local force systems and

ways of working, there is the potential to

OFFICIAL


dramatically reduce the time taken to get

results from forensics samples. Several forces

are currently evaluating such technologies, but

successful adoption will require larger scale

coordination and funding.

The current delivery model does not easily

support the coordinated planning and delivery

of research and development of new forensic

technologies and ways of working. While many

forces have commissioned and delivered high

quality research and development work, there

is no integrated plan for this. This risks

overlaps and gaps between programmes, the

slower dissemination of best practice and the

adoption of differing solutions by individual

forces.

The Government’s Forensic Science Strategy,

published in 2016, highlighted the importance

of maintaining a healthy forensic services

market. Varying procurement and partnership

models are in place, but do not explicitly

address this need, and there remains a strong

need to coordinate management of the

marketplace as a whole. This will become

increasingly important as forces adopt new

technologies and ways of working, such as the

use of rapid at-scene forensics, which have the

potential to disrupt the current scene-

submissions-laboratory delivery model.

Present arrangements for managing

accreditation and regulatory compliance in

forensics and biometrics are fragmented and

costly. There is a need, and also an

opportunity, to rationalise how accreditation

and compliance are managed, particularly as

new technologies become available and are

adopted by forces.

Resource pressures on forces will remain

intense. To mitigate this, forces will need to

deliver more/better services at reduced cost in

areas such as forensics, in order to allow

investment in priority areas that are crucial to

achieving future success and meeting

stakeholders’ expectations.

Police forces thus face a number of challenges

which together mean that the current model of

forensic service delivery will not be capable of

supporting the future mission of policing.

THE CASE FOR TRANSFORMATION

The vision for forensic service delivery is to

deliver high quality, specialist forensic capabilities

that support the Policing Vision 2025 goals, to

rapidly protect communities and the vulnerable,

which are sustainable to meet future threats and

demand.

To meet this challenge, more radical change will

be needed than has been possible to date.

All forces make continuous improvements, and

many collaborate to realise benefits that would not

be achievable at individual force level. Most are

also pursuing programmes to enhance their digital

forensics capability.

Although these approaches are already delivering

substantial improvements, they cannot be

expected to continue to address the full scale of

new challenges and simultaneously realise the

scale of cost savings sufficiently quickly that

forces will need to make in order to address

emerging demands and meet public expectations.

Instead, there is a need for transformational

change of greater breadth, depth and speed than

continuous improvement and local collaborations

can deliver.

OFFICIAL


Although these approaches are already delivering

substantial improvements, they cannot be

expected to continue to address the full scale of

new challenges and simultaneously realise the

scale of cost savings sufficiently quickly that

forces will need to make in order to address

emerging demands and meet public expectations.

Instead, there is a need for transformational

change of greater breadth, depth and speed than

continuous improvement and local collaborations

can deliver.

INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES





stakeholders in an effective, efficient and

sustainable way.

It will do this by:







Criminal Justice System.



sustainable, flexible and coherently organised



emerging threats.

Supporting re-investment in priority areas –

Transformation will enable the delivery of more














Subsequent sections of this Outline Business

Case present an analysis of options for future

forensic delivery, embodying differing degrees of

transformational change to achieve these

objectives.

Minor Major

Aware DrivingRole of

senior leaders

Scale of

benefits

Gra

du

al

Rap

idSp

ee

d

of

ch

an

ge

Incre

men

tal

Pro

fou

nd

Sco

pe

of

ch

an

ge

Collaboration

Continuous

improvement

Transformation

Figure 2: Transformation versus current position

Only transformation can

deliver the required scale

and speed of improvement

OFFICIAL


OPTIONS FOR TRANSFORMATION

Guided by senior stakeholders and working

closely with members of the forensic science

community, the project team has created a set of

potential future service models for evaluation.

Embodying varying degrees of service

transformation, each has been has been iterated

repeatedly within an expert group of senior

practitioners and reviewed with stakeholders to

reach the current set of options.

In parallel with this business design activity, an

assessment of the current police IT landscape

has allowed the project team to identify the

technology architectures that could support each

future service model. The project team has also

worked with the HOB programme team to

understand which elements of the future solution

may be delivered by HOB and the expected dates

for these.

To facilitate comparison between options and

ensure the robustness of the Outline Business

Case analysis, each option has been built around

a specific ‘theme’ that has guided its design.

Within this framework, each option has been

developed to deliver maximum benefits and to

allow a realistic implementation path to be

developed. These then form the basis for the

assessments set out in the Economic Case.

DEVELOPING THE OPTIONS

Guided by these principles, the project team

adopted the following approach to develop five

options for consideration:

Confirmation of business case scope – the

scope of the business case was agreed from

an early stage to include traditional and digital

forensics, but to exclude digital investigations

and intelligence, and communications

intelligence.

Expert involvement – an early decision was

made to use an ‘expert group’ drawn from

policing supported by external business design

specialists funded by the Home Office. This

has brought together deep expertise and

experience in forensic services delivery and

skills in business service analysis modelling to

build and test realistic future delivery models.

Examination of the current and projected IT

landscape – discussions with forces and IT

service providers, including government IT

programmes, have provided an understanding

of the current environment, plans for

development and the scope for future change.

Consideration of current and projected

capabilities and needs – the elements

considered have included fast at-scene

technologies; national strategy, standards,

accreditation; central management and

delivery of laboratory capabilities.

Business design optimisation – a holistic

picture has been constructed for each option

that fits together and exploits to the maximum

the gains offered by process, organisation and

technology changes, both individually and

acting together, to deliver maximum gains for

police, the public and stakeholders.

RECOGNISING SENIOR STAKEHOLDERS’ PERSPECTIVES

Although there is a case for better coordinating

and delivering forensic services, and this Outline

Business Case explores options based on this

premise, it is also recognised that PCCs, Chief

Officers and Scientific Support Managers, as well

as other stakeholders, have legitimate concerns

over some impacts of the potential changes.

In mid-2016, a short survey of PCCs and Chief

Officers was undertaken to elicit their views on the

potential for forensic service transformation. This

was a limited survey, aimed at surfacing broad

concerns, as an input to early service design

work. Stakeholders nevertheless welcomed the

opportunity to share their views, which are

paraphrased below:

“Cost saving is the burning platform and we need to do whatever it takes to deliver an affordable, sustainable

and quality service. The shape of policing has to change and transforming forensics is just part of that bigger

picture”

OFFICIAL


“This is the best way to equip our officers with the tools they need to work in the world today. Data sharing

and more cross-agency and international working just have to be at the heart of how we work in the future –

we can’t let history constrain us”

“No services ‘have’ to remain at local level – but this is a philosophical issue for some. People just need to

get on the train. We might have to take small steps to bring people on the journey”

“This has to be a police-owned service in order to work, and a national model is a step too far – a small

number of multi-force or regional services will deliver just as much benefit, and means we don’t commit

everything to a single model”

“Bigger isn’t necessarily better, and we can’t start with restructuring as the goal. Will support where there’s a

clear benefit to be gained, but won’t put current service at risk without this. National service must explain

how leadership and culture will work – these are what drive quality”

“We just need to do this – we can’t be held back by how things are today, and we need to be ambitious in

our outlook. Failure would be not tackling the national issue and deferring it to a future generation or until a

tragedy forces our hand”

These senior stakeholders clearly held a variety of

starting positions at that time. Although the

options for transformation have evolved since

then, the sentiments expressed have been

reflected in the options design and evaluation

process.

THE FIVE OPTIONS

The project team has explored options for future

forensic service delivery. These range from

making the minimum changes necessitated by the




the consolidation of capabilities to deliver a unified

service to forces.

The Five Options

1 Maintain

service

continuity

Undertake the minimum changes necessitated by updated HOB functionality

Essentially the do nothing option. Forces will be expected to make some changes to

accept the deliverables within the HOB programme and therefore will receive some

benefits such as those associated with improved matching capabilities within the

fingerprint system.

This option forms the baseline against which the other options are assessed in the

Economic Case.

2 Utilise

enablers

Introduce a centrally-enabled business change function to maximise the

benefits obtained from updated HOB functionality

This would work with forces to standardise practice in the utilisation of the HOB

products and light touch coordination to support portfolio work associated with

research and development, quality standards and commercial strategy.

OFFICIAL


3 Maximise

national

infrastructure

Implement a centrally-enabled and delivered infrastructure supporting individual

forces or collaborations

This would include a centrally coordinated quality management function, some

technology improvements that would begin to streamline access to forensic systems

(i.e. web enabled portal) and aggregated procurement of front-line tools (e.g. rapid

forensics, digital kiosks).

4 Aggregate

service

delivery

Aggregate back end services to ‘super-regional hubs’

These would deliver those specialised, repeatable, high throughput forensic services

to an industrialised and appropriate quality standard.

This option would begin to impact on demand driven capabilities such as digital

forensics and mitigate risks associated with resilience in more complex capabilities

that are difficult and expensive to maintain at force and collaboration levels.

Governance and control would be retained at force / collaboration / super-regional

levels.

5 Full

integration

Establish a unified and fully integrated end-to-end forensic service that delivers

to local, regional and national (and international) requirements

This option would simplify governance arrangements and introduce aggregated

capabilities in a consistent way to the appropriate quality standards. It would also

maximise the use of technologies, including at-scene forensic tools, to ensure that the

service can rapidly flex to local requirements. The proposed forensic service would

include all physical and digital forensic activities, but exclude digital investigations and


This option would exert influence over the whole forensic supply chain, including

locally-based scene investigation services and would steer the direction of research

and development, as well as the commercial and partnership approaches to

‘procurement’ of service and supplies.

NB: Although there are some common elements across the options, each option is self-contained, and they

should not be seen as sequential stages on a common implementation path.

Figure 3: The five options

EVALUATING THE OPTIONS

INTERPRETING THE OPTIONS

Analysis of how different service components help

achieve the project’s transformation goals shows

that, within each option, no single component is

pre-eminent. Instead, it is the combined effect of

the design components acting together that will

allow transformation of police forensics and

provide a platform for future services. Individual

elements, such as at-scene forensic technologies,

interactive support, and common standards and

accreditation contribute specific benefits, and are

therefore worthwhile developments in their own

right, but the overall benefits realised are

significantly increased when individual initiatives

complement each other in delivering a

transformed end-to-end service. This affects

significantly the benefit profiles of the more

OFFICIAL


comprehensive options, as it is these that embody

greatest synergies.

It also has implications for the optimum sequence

in which to implement the various process,

organisation and technology changes that

together will deliver the service. Transition

planning will therefore need to take account of the

benefits, interdependencies and costs of the

various initiatives: this is reflected in the outline

transition plans developed for each option.

In order to facilitate the evaluation process, it has

been assumed for design and estimating

purposes that all forces will participate in the

recommended option. Recognising that this may

not be the case in practice, potential variations

from this are handled through sensitivity analysis

in the Economic Case. This supports identification

of the ‘critical mass’ that will sustain a viable

business case for each option.

In order to maximise benefits and avoid

fragmentation of the service, each option

assumes that forces will not be permitted to ‘pick

and mix’ from the range of services provided

within the recommended option. Each forensic

service model has been designed as an

integrated whole, and the Outline Business Case

analyses are predicated on the complete scope of

an individual option being implemented.

INFORMATION GATHERING AND ANALYSIS

Comprehensive data collection, analysis and cost

modelling have enabled development of a robust

understanding of the current position, and

underpin the objective economic assessment of

each option. This has included:

Structured data collection over 9 months from

13 forensic science units through quantitative

and qualitative questionnaires and visits to

forces. This has been used to build a detailed

picture of forensic services’ performance and

costs relating to 23 individual forces in England

and Wales, PSNI, BTP and the NCA.

The use of National Data Sources, including:

ADR

HMIC

CIPFA

Home Office

FMIT

Modelling of the potential efficiency gains and

performance benefits of each option. This has

included sensitivity analyses to support

assessment how different adoption levels by

individual forces potentially impact the costs

and benefits of each option.

Financial assessment of the net present value

of each option, taking account of not only the

benefits and costs involved, but also the

business change cost of implementing

individual options.

This work has been described as representing the

most thorough, robust and insightful analysis of

forensic delivery costs and efficiencies

undertaken to date. As a consequence, it provides

a comprehensive and testable foundation that

supports the business case’s conclusions.

STRATEGIC FIT

In addition to delivering economic benefits, it will

be essential that forensic service provision aligns

with and supports the vision of future policing. The

report Policing Vision 2025, published by NPCC

and APCC, describes how specialist capabilities,

digital policing and clear accountability will

support a local policing model tailored to society’s

needs. This will involve close collaboration

between all elements of policing and its partners,

and require support of high quality, modern,

effective and affordable forensic services.

Each of the options for future forensic service

delivery has therefore been assessed in terms of

Visited

Figure 4: Forces part of data collection visits

OFFICIAL


how well it fits with and supports this future vision,

in addition to a quantitative evaluation of its

economic impact.

DETAILED EVALUATION OF OPTIONS

The five options are described in greater detail in

the Economic Case section of the Outline

Business Case, which presents an evaluation of

the potential qualitative and quantitative impacts

of each.

REALISING THE BENEFITS

While there is a strong case for transformational

change, commitment and strong leadership will

nevertheless be needed in order to overcome the

challenges involved and realise the benefits

potentially available.

IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING

It is important to recognise that the individual

options do not represent sequential points on a

common implementation path. At a high level,

some may include elements of others, but details

differ. Each therefore has a unique

implementation path, which reflects benefits

realisation priorities and delivery

interdependencies.

While Options 4 and 5 may appear complex and

challenging to implement, Options 1, 2 and 3 also

have significant implementation requirements,

driven at least in part by the greater number of

bureaux and forces across which change will

need to be delivered in order to accommodate

planned updates to existing biometric systems.

Also, the more complex options need not be

implemented as a ‘big bang’ but can be achieved

through progressive change.

The key goal at this stage is to agree the

ambition: this will then shape planned activities

and interim organisational structures, ways of

working and technology architectures. As part of

this, forces will have an opportunity to re-shape

wider internal processes and structures in order to

realise the benefits enabled by forensic

transformation, many of which will be in front-line

policing and the CJS.

Implementation planning for the preferred option

will also need to take account of the following

potential constraints on business change:

Notwithstanding breaks of convenience,

novation and convergence, existing contractual

commitments may constrain some forces’

ability to migrate to a new operating model and

technology base in the short term;

There is a need to balance ambition and

benefits: depending on the option selected, the

scale and complexity of the business change

needed could deter effective action, risking

incomplete solutions and poor implementation,

which will in turn reduce the benefits obtained

and restrict the scope for further

improvements;

Delays in selecting and implementing a

preferred future model will increase the gap

between capability being delivered and

evolving needs, thereby increasing the

business change challenge that needs to be

addressed.

These risks are discussed more fully in the

Management Case in this document.

ORGANISATION DESIGN AND GOVERNANCE

The Transforming Forensics project has

recognised, but not yet attempted to resolve,

issues around governance, organisational

structure, sourcing options, staffing and delivery

locations that will need to be resolved in order to

implement the preferred solution. This will be

addressed as part of a Full Business Case, if

commissioned.

The relative merits of alternative structures will

depend on business goals, governance

requirements, the nature of the services being

provided and the starting point for any necessary

transformation. At this stage there is considerable

flexibility over how and where forensic/biometric

services will best be delivered, taking account of

local preferences, policing needs, delivery costs,

capability sharing opportunities, and engagement

with regulatory authorities and forensic service

providers.

OFFICIAL


Additionally, much forensic service activity can

potentially be bought in by forces – as is current

practice. While these considerations apply to all

aspects of the proposed future service, the impact

on FSPs is an area of particular concern to police

forces, the Home Office and the providers

themselves. The recent Forensic Science

Strategy states an explicit goal that the future use

of forensics ‘supports a sustainable market for

forensic services – encouraging partnerships and

encouraging R&D investment’. Work to date

suggests that the preferred approach will continue

to be to use forensic service providers selectively

to maximise benefits while retaining essential

elements within policing.

At this Outline Business Case stage, the future

forensic service models are not sufficiently mature

to allow detailed consideration of these issues,

and stakeholders have not yet had an opportunity

to contribute fully to this debate. Following

confirmation of a preferred option, the core

decisions that will be required should be

identified, agreement reached in outline as to how

these will be made, and appropriate points

specified in the business change programme

when these decisions will need to be made.

The preferred governance model for

recommended forensic service option will be

confirmed in the proposed Full Business Case.

MEETING LOCAL FORCE PRIORITIES

During more recent work with senior forensic

managers, some have expressed concern that, if

a combined service is introduced, there will be

winners and losers in terms of service levels

received and responsiveness to local needs, with

larger, metropolitan forces potentially dominating

service planning and delivery.

Initial service design work to date and an

understanding of how some other organisations

approach this question suggest that in practice

improvements in services both at a local level and

a national level can be delivered. This can, in part,

be facilitated by balancing national governance

with delivery at an appropriate level (from local to

national) to meet forces’ priorities and ways of

working. Nevertheless, these are valid concerns

and will need to be resolved if forensic

transformation is to win approval from most

forces.

Therefore, while this issue has not been

addressed specifically in this Outline Business

Case, it is recognised and will be addressed

subsequently when the service design for the

preferred option is developed in more detail.

INTEGRATING SYSTEMS AND INFORMATION

This Outline Business Case does not provide a

full design for the technology solution needed to

support each option. Instead, it draws on the high-

level business designs to derive a realistic model

that allows estimation of the costs of

implementing and operating the necessary

technology services and infrastructure for each

option.

These technology models were developed by

applying core principles that reflect the earlier

technology review of forces and the contributions

of the expert group. These include:

taking a pragmatic approach to how new

technology will relate to existing police and

forensic systems that will remain in place;

converging on standard package choices and

keeping different elements loosely coupled, to

reduce the complexity of the technology estate

and ease future evolution;

using the same fixed and mobile networks as

the forces being supported;

providing access to application functionality

and data through simple but secure network

access to a common service;

working with IT and software suppliers to

develop and support the tools needed to

enable the forensic business vision.

This work, which has assessed the feasibility of

delivering the technology needed to support each

option, is described more fully in the Economic

Case and in the supporting appendices to the

Outline Business Case.

RESOLVING COMMERCIAL CONSIDERATION

The Forensic Science Strategy sets the following

aspirations for commercial arrangements to

underpin future forensic service provision:

consistent quality management and

standardisation;

OFFICIAL


a review by police forces of the case for a

single service, to achieve economies of scale,

increased capability and resilience;

ongoing oversight of the health of the supply

chain;

stronger partnership with industry and

education to help align programmes with future

business requirements.

These are reflected in the high level objectives for

the project, and are captured in the evaluation of

the five options and the Commercial case sets out

in detail how the preferred option may be

supported commercially.

REGULATORY OVERSIGHT

In taking forward the preferred option for future

forensic services to a Full Business Case, it will

be essential for the future delivery model to

ensure the robustness of the scientific foundations

of police forensic provision and establish sound

risk management processes. It is therefore

proposed that the project continues to engage

with the FSR and the Biometrics Commissioner

following Outline Business Case acceptance to

ensure its detailed proposals meet regulatory

needs in an effective and efficient manner.

PARLIAMENTARY OVERSIGHT

The Home Office will continue to provide updates

to the House of Commons Science and

Technology Committee as options are resolved

and the Full Business Case developed.

CONCLUSION

New law enforcement challenges require new

ways of working, and continuing with current ways

of working cannot adequately serve the public in

the face of changing crime patterns and rising

expectations.

To meet the challenges facing future forensic

service delivery, more radical change will be

needed than has been possible to date. Policing

therefore needs to agree its vision for

transforming future forensic service delivery.

Transformational change offers significant

enduring benefits, in that it:

will embed best practice and deliver high

quality outcomes to support policing’s

safeguarding and public protection mission;

will lead to more resilient, sustainable, flexible

and better organised services capable of

meeting new and emerging threats;

can free resources to support high priority

areas, and thus better position forces to meet

continuing resource pressures;

offers a potential first step towards the wider

police transformation that will be necessary to

meet future needs.

The prospect of transforming police forensic

services in this way is unprecedented, and has

been described by one Chief Constable as a

‘once in a lifetime’ opportunity.

The Transforming Forensics project has

developed and evaluated a range of potential

service models for the future delivery of forensic

services, varying from basic improvement to more

complete transformation. The subsequent

sections of this Outline Business Case provide an

objective evaluation of the benefits and

challenges these options involve, identify a

preferred option, and describe how it may be

realised.

OFFICIAL

TF OBC - v1.1.docx PAGE 19 OF 129 3rd

April 2017

INTRODUCTION

The Economic Case provides a comprehensive

and conservative assessment of the options, in

order to define a preferred option.

This appraisal is presented in the following order

in this chapter, with the proposed option being

identified in the Economic Case Summary:

Option Definition

Transformation Objectives

Capabilities Considered and Associated

Benefits

Development of the Options

Introduction to the Options

(Per Option)

Design Drivers and Key Outcomes

Transition Approach

Option Conclusions

Quantitative Analysis

Introduction to the Analysis

Option 1 (Baseline) Description

Option 2-5 Quantitative Analysis

Option 2-5 Quantitative Analysis –

Summary

Optimism Bias

Sensitivity Analysis

Qualitative Assessment

Introduction

Approach

Analysis

Commercial Considerations

Introduction

Summary

Current Forensic Landscape

High Level SWOT

Options Assessment

Economic Case Summary

Appendices

The following terminology is used throughout the

Economic Case, therefore a brief explanation is

provided below:

Forensic Delivery Costs – Cost of personnel

(including training), accreditation, premises

and services (i.e. logistics and bought in

forensics services from FSPs) for the delivery

of Business As Usual (BAU) forensics

services. IT costs are excluded unless

specifically identified.

Existing IT Delivery Costs – The costs of

maintaining the current level of IT capability.

Investment Costs – Business transition costs

required to deliver an option.

Additional Tech Delivery Costs – Technical

costs (i.e. new systems / services) required to

deliver an option.

Total Costs - the sum of:

Forensic delivery costs

Existing IT delivery costs

Investment costs

Additional Tech Delivery Costs

Financial NPV – Compares the equivalent ‘do

nothing’ Total Cost to the Option Total Cost

Economic Benefits – benefits that can be

quantified in terms of money generated and

money saved.

Business As Usual (BAU) – an ongoing and

unchanging state of affairs despite difficulties

or disturbances.

Economic Case

OFFICIAL


April 2017

‘Do Nothing’ – the baseline position for

comparison within the economic case, also

referred to as Option 1

Economic NPV – Compares the equivalent ‘do

nothing’ Total Cost to the Option Total Cost,

inclusive of benefits

Optimism Bias – An empirically-based

adjustment to a project’s costs to offset the

tendency of optimistic estimation

Qualitative Benefits – benefits that cannot be

measured in numerical form.

Quantitative Benefits – benefits that can be

measured numerically.

Sensitivity Analysis – technique used to

determine how different values of an

independent variable impact a particular

dependent variable under a given set of

assumptions.

Transition – The formal business process that

puts the design goals, priorities and strategies

in place for a successful migration from the

“as-is” to the “to-be” operating model.

OPTION DEFINITION

TRANSFORMATION OBJECTIVES

The Strategic Case sets out the rationale for

transforming forensic service delivery. As part of

this analysis, it identifies the essential goals for a

future service as:

Delivering better outcomes;

Building capability for the future;

Supporting re-investment in priority areas;

Enabling wider reform.

The Strategic Case goes on to describe how a set

of five options for future service design has been

developed for consideration. Drawing to varying

degrees on the transformation goals and reflecting

anticipated developments in forensic and

biometric capabilities, these range from making

the minimum changes necessitated by the




the consolidation of capabilities to deliver a unified

service to forces.

SUMMARY OF EACH OPTION

The Five Options

1 Maintain

service

continuity

Undertake the minimum changes necessitated by updated HOB functionality

Essentially the do nothing option. Forces will be expected to make some changes to

accept the deliverables within the HOB programme and therefore will receive some

benefits such as those associated with improved matching capabilities within the

fingerprint system.

This option forms the baseline against which the other options are assessed in the

Economic Case.

2 Utilise

enablers

Introduce a centrally-enabled business change function to maximise the

benefits obtained from updated HOB functionality

This would work with forces to standardise practice in the utilisation of the HOB

products and light touch coordination to support portfolio work associated with

research and development, quality standards and commercial strategy.

OFFICIAL


April 2017

3 Maximise

national

infrastructure

Implement a centrally-enabled and delivered infrastructure supporting individual

forces or collaborations

This would include a centrally coordinated quality management function, some

technology improvements that would begin to streamline access to forensic systems

(i.e. web enabled portal) and aggregated procurement of front-line tools (e.g. rapid

forensics, digital kiosks).

4 Aggregate

service

delivery

Aggregate back end services to ‘super-regional hubs’

These would deliver those specialised, repeatable, high throughput forensic services

to an industrialised and appropriate quality standard.

This option would begin to impact on demand driven capabilities such as digital

forensics and mitigate risks associated with resilience in more complex capabilities

that are difficult and expensive to maintain at force and collaboration levels.

Governance and control would be retained at force / collaboration / super-regional

levels.

5 Full

integration

Establish a unified and fully integrated end-to-end forensic service that delivers

to local, regional and national (and international) requirements

This option would simplify governance arrangements and introduce aggregated

capabilities in a consistent way to the appropriate quality standards. It would also

maximise the use of technologies, including at-scene forensic tools, to ensure that the

service can rapidly flex to local requirements. The proposed forensic service would

include all physical and digital forensic activities, but exclude digital investigations and


This option would exert influence over the whole forensic supply chain, including

locally-based scene investigation services and would steer the direction of research

and development, as well as the commercial and partnership approaches to

‘procurement’ of service and supplies.

NB: Although there are some common elements across the options, each option is self-contained, and they

should not be seen as sequential stages on a common implementation path.

Figure 5: Summary of the five options

OFFICIAL


April 2017

DEFINING THE OPTIONS AND

BENEFITS

From the outset of work on the Outline Business

Case, the project team worked to identify the key

benefits that underpinned the four strategic

themes described above. These benefits were

mapped to capabilities inherent within the service

design for each option.

The mapping of benefits to capabilities assisted

the design efforts by helping define the service

models at a finer level of detail and linking their

characteristics specifically to the benefits sought.

The early identification of the benefits, and the

capabilities to which they align, enabled the team

to define the following within the Economic Case:

the scope range that each option would

comprise;

quantitative values associated with each

potential benefit, aligned to options;

qualitative benefits, aligned to options.

The capability breakdown used to define and

bound the options at a summary level, are

detailed below:

Policy;

Research & Development (R&D);

Quality Management;

Network of advisory specialists;

Marketplace;

Tasking of forensic personnel;

Traditional forensic resources and capability;

Rapid at scene technology (FP marks, DNA

stains and footprints left at crime scene)

Rapid biometric identification

Digital forensics;

Exploiting HOB capabilities;

Logistics;

Central management;

Work management system;

Scene reconstruction;

Digital scene recording / scene investigation;

Cross-case analysis, i.e. intelligence.

The options presented in this business case are

built around these capabilities, both from a

business and technical design perspective, so

that there is a clear line of sight from benefit to

capability and ultimately, the option presented.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE OPTIONS

An Expert Group of Forensic Practitioners

developed the detail of the five design options

through a series of development and review

sessions. The options were created in accordance

with the development stages below:

1. Definition of the Transforming Forensics

vision.

2. Definition of the capability for the Forensic

Services.

3. Identification of the Forensic Services to

attain the vision, including a definition of

the service outcomes and the benefits

required of those future services.

4. Alignment of the services along five

distinct approaches to create the options

as presented in this Economic Case

The options were then tested against data

collected from visits to forces, and best practice

from other public and private sector organisations

to validate the viability of the designs and to

identify the costs and benefits associated with

each.

These workshops, and other events / activities,

were also used to define the technical solution

that underpins each option. Whilst the Economic

Case does not go into the detail of the technical

solution, the Transforming Forensics Technical

Design3 document outlines:

the technical aspects of each options design;

key findings of visits to forces to understand

their ‘as-is’ technology;

principles for forensic technology distribution

and delivery;

technology packages for option costing;

assumptions underpinning the technical design

and items to be challenged in the FBC;

technology costing assumptions.

OPTION 1 | MAINTAIN SERVICE

CONTINUITY

This option focuses on maintaining the

continuity of the forensic service when the

IDENT1 system is decommissioned and

replaced by the HOB Matcher tool. Requiring

minimal adjustments in the delivery of

forensic services, this is the ‘do nothing’

3 Transforming Forensics Technical Design

Document

OFFICIAL


April 2017

option and serves as the baseline for

comparison in the Economic Case.


Maintaining the continuity of forensic services as

technology is migrated would result in no change

to the way forensic services are currently

organised; these would continue to be locally or

regionally owned, and delivered by local forces or

collaborations. The key outcomes for this option

include:

More accurate automated fingerprint matching

and consistent availability of ‘lights out’

capability for bureaux. The improved accuracy

of the matcher algorithm is estimated to

increase the number of identifications achieved

by approximately 13%.

An improved digital fingerprint mark up and

analysis capability, arising from the

introduction of improved analytical applications

in the HOB Matcher tools.

The ability to conduct Fingerprint analysis at a

single terminal, removing the need to copy,

paste and print between multiple information

points; this results from the implementation of

access to HOB capabilities through force

desktop IT and from updated interfaces

between HOB and local bureau tools.

The ability to work from multiple desks or

locations, through the introduction of a browser

portal to the HOB matcher, from the desktop.

Automated DNA processing to produce faster

matching for repeatable services and enable

staff to focus on delivering more specialist

services. This will provide faster forensic

results to front line staff.

This option will not include the following

outcomes:

Changes to any forensic services other than

Fingerprint and DNA services.

Centrally co-ordinated or funded business

change activity to support the introduction of

the HOB technical changes. Any coordination

would need to be initiated and achieved

locally, for example, as an extension of

existing collaborations between bureaux.

Changes to the current organisation of

Fingerprint bureaux, the DNA Delivery Unit or

other forensic services. Force Fingerprint

matching services would continue to be

managed and delivered either locally or

regionally.

Changes to existing approach to accreditation

for forensic tools and services.

Transition Approach

Forces/collaborations would be required to

individually plan and implement the changes

required from the migration to accept the new

technology into their operational processes.

Migration activities would require staff to prepare

for technical integration and possibly for some

minor changes to processes.

Option 1 - Conclusion

The replacement technology from HOB will

enable some incremental improvements to the

Fingerprint and DNA matching services. This

provides an opportunity to change the focus of

Fingerprint bureaux staff from volume Fingerprint

processing to more complex Fingerprint matching

activity, should individual bureaux choose this.

However, this option focuses only on maintaining

biometric service continuity. It delivers no

transformational impact on the wider forensic

service, and therefore has no transformational

impact on the services offered to the public. This

model perpetuates the currently fragmented

approach to forensic delivery and the high-costs

associated with delivering multiple, duplicated

services, with each running at less than optimum

capacity, and therefore offers limited value for

money.

The Transforming Forensics programme would

not offer any enhancements to the HOB outcomes

listed above should this ‘do nothing’ option be

preferred.

OPTION 2 | UTILISE ENABLERS

This option focuses on maximising the value

derived from existing enabling tools. It will

promote further co-ordination of some cross-

force forensic services, building on those

which already exist, including the Forensic

Delivery Board and NPCC Strategic

Marketplace Board.


There would be, in addition to roles that exist in

the current forensic organisations, a small number

of roles introduced to support the co-ordination of

some enabling forensic services, in the areas of

Policy, R&D, Quality Management, Forensic

Expertise and Marketplace services. The use of

OFFICIAL


April 2017

existing enablers would result in no organisational

structure changes and no changes to how

forensic services are currently managed. The key

outcomes from this option would include:

A business change team to consistently

implement the technical enablers from the

HOB programme and deliver a single, common

fingerprint matching process for all bureaux.

This would result in all forces running the most

efficient consistent Fingerprint process,

thereby providing faster forensic results to front

line staff, and a more consistent delivery of

Fingerprint services.

A central forum and a co-ordinating role for

each of the enabling services: Policy, R&D,

Quality Management, Forensic Expertise and

Marketplace services. This could build on the

existing marketplace co-ordination and expert

networks. Some knowledge sharing regarding

approaches to accreditation across forces

would occur with the introduction of a central

Quality Management support role.

A national forensic access portal that would

federate force log-ins to allow access to

national capabilities and cross-border

collaboration. This would result in further

sharing of best practice and some alignment of

forensic approaches across forces, for those

that chose to be involved.

The above would be in addition to the outcomes

delivered in Option 1,Maintain Service Continuity,

which include:

More accurate, automated fingerprint matching




increase the number of identifications achieved

by approximately 13%.


analysis capability, from the introduction of

improved analytical applications in the HOB

Matcher tools.

The ability to conduct Fingerprint analysis at a









portal to the HOB matcher, via a browser on

the desktop.


matching for repeatable services, and enable


services, which again, will provide faster

forensic results to front line staff.

This option will not include the following:

Any centrally designed or coordinated

organisation structure changes. Similar to

Option 1, force forensic management and

delivery would remain locally provisioned with

no change to the structure of the forensic

organisations.

Ongoing support for the use of collaboration

tools. Use of these will be self-initiated and any

support service agreements will need to be

purchased and managed locally.

Transition Stages

Transition for each force would be defined and

supported by a centrally co-ordinated business

change programme to deliver a co-ordinated,

more efficient implementation of the technical and

process changes involved. The approach to

transition would be to implement the changes in

groups of forces at a time, to better enable

migration deadlines to be met. At the end of each

change, the transition would be assessed, the

approach refined and then the best practice

resulting from prior implementations would move

to the next group to transition.

An overview of the transition approach for this

option is detailed in Appendix B-2.


This option focuses on using technical enablers

and standard processes to improve the efficiency

of the existing way of delivering Fingerprint

services. A single, consistent Fingerprint process

will result in identifications being returned quicker

to officers to aid their investigation. The

introduction of a business change team to co-

ordinate the implementation of the HOB

functionality will enable more consistent and

effective business implementation of technical

change.

However, this option offers incremental

improvements to a small biometric element of the

much wider forensic service. This offers limited

value for money, with the cost of continuing to run

OFFICIAL


April 2017

many duplicate biometric services from the

different physical delivery locations remaining

high. This option offers limited joined-up delivery

and does not support transformational change to

keep up to date with the changing crime

landscape. It will, similarly to Option 1, perpetuate

a fragmented delivery of existing and future

forensic services. Additionally, although a

consistent approach to transition and consistent

processes will be implemented, the fragmented

governance may result in inconsistencies in

processes still being created over time.

The transition to this option will require funding

from forces locally as this option only drives out

incremental improvements.

OPTION 3 | MAXIMISE THE NATIONAL

INFRASTRUCTURE

This option would provide the opportunity to

introduce best value, more consistent front-

line technology for forces or regions.

Additionally, this would coordinate some

enabling services at a national level, as well as

maximising the effectiveness nationally of

investments in enabling technology.

Design Drivers and Key Outputs

This option offers the opportunity to protect

victims through the introduction of more

consistent, value for money front line technology.

This option would also improve forensic practices

by creating a formal team to provide forces with

national support for key enabling services

including Quality Management and Procurement.

The driver to maximise this national infrastructure

would require no organisational structure changes

alterations in how forensic services are currently

managed or delivered. The key outcomes of this

option include:

Access to best value front line and scene

technology, digitisation applications and scene

capture technology, for example RapidDNA.

Central procurement support would secure the

benefits of a national pricing mechanism for

scene technology. The Met Digital Forensics

and Rapid Forensic Proof of Concepts would

inform best practice here. This would result in

a marked improvement in the victim

experience, due to the speed of forensic

results returned, which would support police

investigations where forces use this

procurement mechanism.

Development of the Head of Professions role

and a team to offer forces further enabling

support in the areas of Forensic Policy, R&D,


Marketplace services. This would include the

development of common approaches, best

practice and partnerships.

A central Quality Management service to

provide, at a minimum, proficiency testing,

competency testing, validation, standard

operating procedures and auditing capability

across force forensics. This would result in

strong co-ordination of accreditation activities

across forces by a central team and therefore

a significant reduction in accreditation costs.

The above would be in addition to the outputs

delivered in Options 1 and 2, which would

include:






efficient consistent Fingerprint process,

thereby providing faster forensic results to front

line staff, and a more consistent delivery of

Fingerprint services.


federate force logins to allow access to





that chose to be involved

More accurate, automated Fingerprint

matching and consistent availability of ‘lights

out’ capability for bureaux. The improved

accuracy of the matcher algorithm is estimated

to increase the number of identifications

achieved by approximately 13%.




Matcher tools.

The ability to conduct fingerprint analysis at a










the desktop.

OFFICIAL


April 2017






This option does not include the following:

Any changes to the organisational structure of

forensic services, except for the introduction of

a co-ordination services team; these will

remain locally managed and delivered.

Central procurement, management and

service support of forensic tools and services.

The central co-ordinating team will assist in

negotiating pricing mechanisms and offer

purchasing and commercial support to forces,

which would continue to procure locally.

Nationally owned and delivered accreditation

services. Though a central team will be in

place to support co-ordination of these

activities, ownership of this activity remains at

the existing force or collaboration level.

Transition Stages

Transition to this option would be supported by a

centrally managed and delivered business change

programme.

An overview of the transition approach for Option

3 is detailed in Appendix B-3.


This option would offer significant technology and

infrastructure benefits for those forces that choose

to utilise the centrally negotiated pricing

mechanisms to purchase scene technology and

other tools and services. Where adopted,

enhanced scene technology could deliver a

significant reduction in elapsed time in forensic

processing, through the introduction of more

consistent, best value front line forensic

technology such as RapidDNA kits. The

coordination and support for Forensic Policy,

R&D, Quality Management, Forensic Expertise

and Marketplace services would produce a more

consistent and innovative approach to delivering

these forensic services through reduced

duplication and a focus on a common strategy for

these areas.

However, the benefits of this option rely on forces

choosing to utilise the procurement and co-

ordination support available to them and to fund

the front-end technology. This could still allow a

lack of consistency in the front-line services

offered to the public, arising from how this

technology is used or from forces not having the

available funding for this technology. Additionally,

no ongoing service support would be provided for

any scene technology purchased using the

centrally negotiated pricing mechanism and so

this would require local negotiation and

implementation.

The majority of forensic services would still

operate in silos with this option, continuing to

incur the high running costs of multiple, duplicate

services. Additionally, should a sufficient number

of forces choose not to use the co-ordination

support, the creation of this team would be a

duplicate in forensic services further than the

current position, as forces would still retain

resources in these areas locally. This would result

in higher overall costs. Similar to Options 1 and 2,

this option would continue the fragmented

approach to the introduction of new forensic

services in the future; for example, facial

recognition will continue to grow at differing rates

in local labs, resulting in higher running costs and

continued inconsistent approaches to

identification.

OPTION 4 | AGGREGATE FORENSIC SERVICES

This option would aggregate the management

and delivery of ‘non-frontline’ forensic

services to a small number of ‘super-regions’

covering England and Wales. These would be

larger than current geographically-based

regions and collaborations. This would drive

efficiencies in the processing of high-

throughput, repeatable forensic services and

free up capability to focus on more complex

forensic processing. It would not alter how

front-line forensic services are managed and

delivered.


Aggregating high throughput specialised

capabilites will create an effective, efficient

service whilst building public confidence through

consistency of experience. This option redefines

the existing organisation structures for forensic

‘back-end’ services by aggregating the

management and delivery of those services into

super-regions. This option will deliver the

following outcomes:

OFFICIAL


April 2017

Facilitates a focus on more complex lower

volume forensic services by driving efficiencies

in the delivery of high throughput, repeatable

services.

Value-for-money ‘back-end’ services with

significantly low costs arising through the

reduction in the number of delivery locations

required, and maximising the efficiency of

delivering high volume repeatable processes.

Opportunities to drive consistency in the

delivery of digital forensic processing, resulting

in improved capability to support forces in

tackling emerging crime types.

Consistent delivery of face, footwear, scars,

marks, tattoos and pattern matching services

to provide a more complete forensic picture to

support investigations.

A national forensic portal to support access to

multiple forensic systems including digital

forensic image and video processing and

scene reconstruction services, together with

more flexible access to national data services

such as the National Footwear Database. This

would enable staff to gain access to wider sets

of information to improve efficiency in delivery.


delivered in Options 1 to 3, which would include:




Central procurement support would secure the

benefits of a national pricing mechanism for

scene technology. This would result in a

marked improvement in the victim experience,

due to the speed of forensic results returned

which would support police investigations,

where forces that use this procurement

mechanism.

Development of the Head of Professions role

and the team to offer forces further support to

forces in the areas of Forensic Policy, R&D,


Marketplace services. This would include the

development of common approaches, best

practice, partnerships and IP.

A central Quality Mmanagement service to

provide, at a minimum, proficiency testing,

competency testing, validation, standard

operating procedures and auditing capability

across force forensics. This would result in a

reduction in the cost of accreditation, as this

could be co-ordinated centrally rather than

each force requiring its own approach to

gaining accreditation.






efficient consistent fingerprint process, thereby

providing faster forensic results to front line

staff, and a more consistent delivery of

fingerprint services.







that chose to be involved

More accurate, automated fingerprint matching




increase the number of matches achieved by

approximately 13%.




Matcher tools.











the desktop.







Changes to the delivery of front-line services

or more complex forensic processing services.

These would remain delivered at a regional or

local level as they currently are.

Changes to the national governance,

management and delivery of existing national

services such as NDU and NABIS.

OFFICIAL


April 2017

Transition Stages

Transition to this option would require a change

from forces delivering back-end forensic services

at a current local level to these services being

delivered on a super-regional level, which will in

turn necessitate consolidation of physical

locations to better meet demand in a more cost

effective way. Transition for forces to super-

regional delivery would occur in stages, to confirm

the approach to aggregating the services with a

few forces, and a review of improvements for the

next group of forces to consolidate within super-

regions would follow.

An overview of the transition approach for Option

4 is detailed in Appendix B-3


This option would deliver significant benefits to

operational policing. It would drive efficiencies in

back-end services to enable greater focus on the

development of the more specialist forensic

capabilities that are needed to tackle more

complex crimes. This option would result in

significantly reduced running costs as a

consequence of fewer labs being required and a

reduced risk in the end-to-end supply chain as

aggregation will strengthen the negotiation

position by introducing category management

approaches to procurement within each super-

region.

However, this option creates a strong divide

between local policing ownership and delivery of

Crime Scene Investigation (CSI) services and the

super-regional ownership of back-end services,

which could exacerbate some of the problems

encountered by current collaborations.

Additionally, inefficiencies and inconsistency in

local front-line services will impact the ability to

drive efficiencies in centrally run, high volume

forensic services. Although delivering back-end

services at a super-regional level would

significantly lower running costs, inefficiencies

would still exist in running duplicate services,

more than required to meet national demand,

managed by different super-regional bodies.

Separate management of parts of the forensic

service by super-regions could also restrict the

development of a holistic, national forensic view

for emerging threats to support police intelligence

activity.

Transition costs with this option would be high

owing to the complexity and the number of

locations involved and this option lacks the

flexibility to develop future forensic services

consistently and cost effectively, as this would

require duplication across super-regions.

OPTION 5 | FULL FORENSIC INTEGRATION

This option would establish a unified, fully

integrated end-to-end forensic service under

single management that would deliver to local,

regional and national (and international)

requirements. It would design, direct and

deliver forensic services built around local

forces’ needs, from the scene of crime to the

transfer of forensic evidence into the criminal

justice system, while seeking process

economies that would offer best value for

money. The proposed forensic service would

include all traditional and digital forensic

activities, but would exclude digital

investigations and intelligence, and



This option would redefine existing organisational

structures and the ownership of forensic services

to result in a centrally governed and managed

service. Together with moving forensic services

as close to the scene as possible, it will enable

the provision of forensic services to occur at as

near to optimum capacity as possible, balancing

capacity to demand. Delivery of the service will

occur via a mix of local, regional and national

delivery methods, depending on the service, to

retain the necessary link between police forensics

and local communities where this remains

paramount.

Key outcomes which are unique to this option

include:

Digital kiosks and triage tools to be

consistently available at the front line in order

to optimise the victim experience by removing

the need to confiscate digital devices, to

support the police in resolving and preventing

crime more effectively.

Digital self service to be introduced at the front

line via a ‘digital first’ approach. Digitisation of

exhibits would be enabled, where possible

(and approriate). This support efficiencies in

matching activities and deliver a consistent,

OFFICIAL


April 2017

highly efficient and accurate evidential input

into the CJS.

Digital labs in place to produce improved

results for digital evidence and intelligence for

police investigations.

Intelligent use of technology to assess and

deliver to local priorities, from the reinvestment

available from the costs savings resulting in

unifying forensic services

Forensic processing service to be available

24/7 through the delivery of a consolidated

forensic service, end-to-end. The result of

which would be the right prioritisation of

forensic services and an aggregated forensic

response for the police.

Provision of a forensic intelligence service

spanning across boundaries to better tackle

emerging, national threats and to minimise

and prevent crime. This would be supported

by a new forensic casework management and

intelligence capability to provide seamless

access to case-related status and progress, as

well as the joined-up forensic intelligence to

support more complete and timely detections

and forensic outcomes.

A focus on more complex forensic services by

driving efficiencies in the delivery of high

throughput, repeatable services.

Value for money ‘back-end’ services from a

large reduction in running costs from the

reduction in the number of delivery locations

required and in maximising the efficiency at

running those high volume processes.

Resulting in improved public perception of

quality of service.

Opportunities to drive consistency in the

delivery of digital forensic processing, resulting

in the ability to support tackling emerging crime

types.

Comprehensive national direction and

management of forensic services drives

delivery at national and local scale, appropriate

to force priorities and needs.

Consistency in face, footwear, scars, marks,

tattoos and pattern matching at a super-

regional level to provide a more holistic

forensic picture to support investigations.

A national forensic portal to support access to

multiple forensic systems including digital

forensic image and video processing, scene

reconstruction services, and more flexible

access to national data services like the

National Footwear Database. This would

enable staff to gain access to wider sets of

information from one place to improve

efficiency in delivery.

Central co-ordination and delivery of Forensic

Policy, R&D, Quality Management, Advisory

and Procurement and Commercial services to

deliver best practice approaches, national

partnerships.

Standardised aggregated end-to-end

processes within a Quality Management

environment, resulting in consistent

experiences by service users regardless of

force.

Efficient management of risk in the supply

chain. An integrated approach will strengthen

the negotiation position and allow a single

category management approach to attain best

value for money from third parties.


delivered in other options, which would include:







that chose to be involved.




Matcher tools.












locations, from the introduction of a portal to

the HOB matcher, via a browser on the

desktop.






OFFICIAL


April 2017


Any local or regional management of services.

This option would result in a central, national

management of service (delivery would occur

via a mixture of local, regional and national

methods).

A service model for this option can be seen in

Appendix B-6.

Transition stages

Transition to this model would be completed via a

number of stages. An incremental approach to

transformation would allow the ability to change,

assess and adjust during a transition of this scale,

rather than a ‘big bang’ implementation,

acknowledging that this transformation may occur

over multiple years. The key benefits of this

transition approach include continual alignment

with budgetary positions and the ability to respond

to any future changes to the forensic landscape.

This change would be planned and managed by a

central business change programme with local

business change staff to support a smooth

transition. An overview of the transition approach

for Option 5 is detailed in Appendix B-4.


This model would redefine how forensic services

are delivered. A move to a unified service would

provide the opportunity to transform the user

experience, support safeguarding and preventing

crime and the capability to keep up with a

changing and inreasingly complex crime

landscape. This option would be designed around

the user needs, moving forensic processing as

close to the scene as possible, whilst still

generating significant cost savings, which could

be reinvested. Self service at the scene,

consistent rapid scene technology and digital first

approaches are enabled within the scope of this

model at the front-line, with 24/7 forensic

processing, process automation and national

forensic intelligence capabilities being made

possible in back end services.

This option would transform the way that forensic

services are delivered; the changes required are

complex and far reaching. However, this option

may be politically challenging since it results in

forensic services moving away from local or

regional ownership to central control.

MEETING TRANSFORMATION GOALS





stakeholders. It will do this by:







Criminal Justice System.



sustainable, flexible and coherently organised



emerging threats.

Supporting re-investment in priority areas –Transformation will enable the delivery of more














The ways in which the individual options align with

the transformation themes underpinning this

busines case are summarised in the table on the

following page.

OFFICIAL


April 2017

Delivering better outcomes Building capability

for the future

Supporting re-investment in

priority areas

Enabling wider reform

Maintain service

continuity

Undertake the

minimum changes

necessitated by

updated HOB

functionality

Improved fingerprint matching

accuracy, leading to more

identifications, plus some

coordination of R&D and quality

standards

No change from current position Minor cost savings only – not

expected to enable major

investment in other areas

No impact

Utilise enablers

Introduce a centrally

enabled business

change function to

maximise the benefits

obtained from updated

HOB functionality

Improved fingerprint matching

accuracy, leading to more

matches, plus some

coordination of R&D and quality

standards

Only limited change from current

position, as forces/collaborations

coordinate approaches to R&D,

standards and commercial

activities only on an ad-hoc basis

Local cost savings only – not

expected to enable major


No impact

Maximise national

infrastructure

Implement a centrally

enabled and delivered

infrastructure

supporting individual

forces or regions

Scope for wide improvements in

forces participating

National coordination would

facilitate planning and help steer

R&D

Significant risk of ‘drift’ in local

ways of working, which would

impede or prevent future

changes

Local cost savings through

coordinated planning and

purchasing with forces choosing

to use the central pricing

mechanism.

No realisation of cost reductions

through economies of scale

from service consolidation.

Not expected to enable major


Limited impact. Central

coordination would assist

planning and some business

change (but only in forces

adopting central frameworks and

standards)

Continuation of a loosely

coupled forensic service delivery

OFFICIAL


April 2017

Delivering better outcomes Building capability

for the future

Supporting re-investment in

priority areas


Aggregate service

delivery

Aggregate ‘non-

frontline’ services to

‘super regional hubs’

Regionally optimised common

processes, economies of scale,

agreed prioritisation and

consistent case tracking

Inter-regional knowledge

sharing limitations could restrict

dissemination of best practice

nationally

Regional scale would facilitate

planning and investment (though

not to same extent as national

approach)

Significant risk of longer-term

‘drift’ between regions in ways of

working, which would impede

future change

Scale economies at super-

regional level could enable

some re-investment in priority

areas, but savings would be

partly offset by the increased

operating costs in comparison to

a national model

Adoption of a geographically-

based super-regional model

could impede (or fail to support

effectively) future policing

reforms, by establishing an

inflexible delivery structure, for

forensic services that does not

align with other service reforms

The emergence of super-

regional variations could further

hinder wider reforms

Full integration

Establish a unified and

fully integrated end to

end forensic service

that delivers to local,

regional and national

(and international)

requirements

Optimised common processes,

economies of scale, agreed

prioritisation and consistent

case tracking

Consistent processes and

access to latest technologies

provides strong foundation for

planned change, through simpler

planning and easier execution

Maximum efficiency in the use

of resources (including people,

equipment and premises)

through national planning and

load sharing

Common processes and tools

nationally would provide a

foundation to readily adapt to

the needs of future reforms in

policing

Figure 6: Meeting transformational goals

This simple analysis indicates that Option 5 (Full

Integration) best supports the Strategic Themes.

Option 4 (Aggregate Service Delivery) also aligns

with some themes, but is unable to provide a

coherent platform for future service development

and would not necessarily support the wider

police reform programme. In practice, the

regional aggregation model could prove to be an

obstacle, rather than an enabler, to future service

development and support for future police

transformation.

Option 3 (Maximise National infrastructure)

partially addresses some of the themes, but does

not provide comprehensive support, and some

goals would remain unresolved.

Option 1 (Maintain Service Continuity) and

Option 2 (Utilise Enablers) do not address the

strategic themes to a meaningful extent, and thus

cannot be considered transformational.

OFFICIAL


April 2017

IMPACT ON STAKEHOLDERS

The tables below illustrate the potential main

impacts on forensic services’ diverse stakeholder

base.

Option 1

Victim

“I continue to receive the same local response

from my police force”

“I would like my case to be progressed quicker”

“It’s a shame that my phone had to be taken away

for evidence”

“I’m not sure I would report things to the police

knowing how long they kept my phone”

Police Officer

“There has been a little improvement in the time it

takes to get some fingerprint and DNA matches

back recently, which helps with our investigation”

“Having tools to collect basic forensic intelligence

at the scene would help to identify suspects who

may still be nearby, and prevent them from re-

offending”

“It would be great if we were better able to

process digital forensics as routine procedure, we

often have to wait for devices to be sent off to be

processed, which makes the investigation”

CSI

“I would like some more tools to assist me in

gaining a rapid response on exhibits to support

scene collection, and prioritise work”

Forensic practitioner

“We are improving small parts of the matching

process over time to try to speed up the accuracy

and time taken to achieve a match”

“I would like us to be able to offer a faster service,

a lot of what we do could be automated further

and we could focus on more complex cases”

“Developing our digital forensics capability

remains a huge challenge”

Chief Officer

“We match more fingerprints and marks, leading

to faster resolution of crimes, and protection of

local communities”

“We have not been able to release any resources

to support new priority areas”

“However I am aware performance is variable

across the country”

Figure 7: Stakeholder impacts – Option 1

Option 2

Victim




“It’s a shame that my phone had to be taken away

for evidence”

“I’m not sure I would report things to the police

knowing how long they kept my phone”

Police Officer

“There has been a little improvement in the time it

takes to get some fingerprint and DNA matches

back recently, which helps with our investigation”

“Having tools to collect basic forensic intelligence

at the scene would help to identify suspects who

may still be nearby, and prevent them from re-

offending”

“It would be great if we were better able to

process digital forensics as routine procedure, we

often have to wait for devices to be sent off to be

processed, which makes the investigation

lengthy”

CSI

“I would like some more tools to assist me in

gaining a rapid response on exhibits to support

scene collection and to prioritise my work”

“I get frustrated that ways of working between

forces are so different; it makes no sense and it

prevents me from being able to work outside of

the force’s border”


“We are improving small parts of the matching

process over time to try to speed up the accuracy

and time taken to achieve a match”

“I would like us to be able to offer a faster service,

a lot of what we do could be automated further

and we could focus on more complex cases”

“Developing our digital forensics capability

remains a huge challenge”

Chief Officer







OFFICIAL


April 2017

Option 3

Victim




“I would like to be able to get updates on my case

quickly and easily”

Police Officer

“Our force bought some Rapid DNA machines

recently and these have really helped to speed up

investigations, it would be great if forces could

have access to these to provide a consistent

service to the public”

“Forensic processing occurring during weekends

would really help to speed up investigations”

“ I don’t have the knowledge and tools to look for

digital evidence”

CSI

“I have access to some great rapid technology at

the scene. It means I can gain matches at the

scene, which helps me to prioritise forensic

collection and support police with their leads

quicker. It would be great if colleagues across the

border had this too”

“I get frustrated that ways of working between

forces are so different; it makes no sense and it

makes me far less effective in being able to work

outside of the force’s border”


“Buying products and services jointly with other

forces has helped reduce costs”

“Despite central support, the pace of change

makes digital forensics a continuing challenge”

“We can still only provide forensic services during

‘office hours’, needing to rely special

arrangements for urgent cases”

“The central R&D support team has helped to give

us a view on what other forces are doing and

where we can focus our innovation funding so we

don’t duplicate the same research”

“It would be great if we could offer services during

more hours of the week to help officers progress

their investigations”

Chief Officer






“Listening to colleagues in larger forces, I am

concerned that our forensic capabilities can’t

keep up with the pace of change in forensic

science and changing crime types”


Option 4

Victim

“I continue to receive the same local response from

my police force”

“The officer had a suspect within a couple of days,

which is much better than I was expecting. This

makes me feel safer that the person responsible has

been caught”

Police Officer

“The ident results for marks and DNA are now very

efficient , I get results in a matter of hours”

“It’s frustrating that some CSIs can’t come to some

priority scenes because they are aligned to a

different force”

CSI

“I have access to some great rapid technology at the

scene, it means I can gain matches at the scene,

which helps me to prioritise exhibit collection and

support police with their leads quicker. It would be

great if colleagues across the border had this too”

“I get frustrated that ways of working between forces

are so different; it makes no sense and it makes me

far less effective in being able to work outside of the

force’s border”


“The move to super-regions has meant that we can

start to really focus on digital forensics and

processing digital evidence in a wider range of

cases, which is a big improvement on what we used

to be able to do in force”

“Our cost for accreditation has dramatically reduced

from only needing to be accredited within the region”

“Dissemination of best practice between regions is

limited, and I worry that we are heading in different

directions, which will make future co-operation

increasingly difficult ”

“There is a lot of inconsistency in how CSIs and front

line staff use the service and deliver submissions,

which sometimes causes inefficiencies. It would be

great if we could be more consistent”

Chief Officer

“Our forensic delivery structure doesn’t align with the

latest police reform thinking, which makes it harder

to support important initiatives effectively”

“I hear of great things happening with digital

forensics in other regions, but worry that they aren’t

finding their way to our force”


OFFICIAL


April 2017

Option 5

Victim

“I receive a quicker response from my local police

force, compared to how it used to be”

“I was relieved that my phone didn’t need to be

taken to collect evidence, this was taken from my

mobile at the time”

“I was able to find out quickly and easily the

progress of my case whenever I wanted, without

having to contact the police directly”

Police Officer

“I was able to apprehend the suspect close to the

scene because of the speed that the forensic

information was supplied, which was almost

immediate”

“Receipt of much earlier identifications enables

me to focus on priority lines of enquiry, and it is

safer for me because I can perform risk

assessments on suspects”

“The speed with which we can process cases

through to the CPS has improved dramatically

now the processes have been streamlined. We

seem to be getting more early pleas”

“The availability of national forensic intelligence

helps me not only understand crime patterns but

also solve individual cases more quickly”

“Forensic services available at weekends has

helped shorten the time needed to resolve cases”

CSI

“We are now intelligently tasked according to

priorities, our skills, location, availability and

workload. We are doing a better job for the public,

we are more productive and the work is more

rewarding”.

“I have consistent access to up to date technology

to help me digitise and process most evidence at

the scene. This is standard for all CSIs now”

“There is more opportunity to learn new skills in

digital forensics, so I can keep my skills current”


“We have a larger, efficient digital forensic

capability now which means we can tackle new

crime types, which seem to be on the increase,

much more effectively”

“We can now offer a 24x7 forensic service, since

we are part of one virtual service; so we know we

are providing forensic evidence as soon as is

possible”

“I can look forward to a career in cutting-edge

forensic science, using the latest technologies

and supporting police forces nationally”

“I believe that, through our central forum, forensic

professionals are much more engaged and

influential in the direction of forensic services in

the UK”

“Our relationships with FSPs are now handled by

a central commercial team, allowing me to focus

more on delivering high quality services to local

forces”

Chief Officer

“I am able to reallocate some of my resources to

address emerging local and national priorities”

“I am confident that, by sharing common

structures and ways of working with other forces,

we are better placed to serve local people and

evolve our capabilities rapidly and effectively to

meet future threats to society”

“By sharing resources, especially in specialist

areas, we have been able to reduce forensic

service costs significantly”

“Our structure and ways of working are highly

flexible and we are well placed to support the

wider policing reforms that we anticipate”


From this, it is evident that Option 5 (Full

integration) has the greatest positive impact for

stakeholders and, from a policing perspective,

offers the strongest foundation for service

development and the support of future reforms.

OFFICIAL


April 2017

QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT

INTRODUCTION

The quantitative assessment of the Economic

Case is presented over several sections, as

outlined below:

The baseline description of Option 1, which is

the ‘do nothing’ within the Economic Case,

identifying:

Applicable transition costs

Business As Usual (BAU) costs and

assumptions

Option 2-5 quantitative assessment detailing:

The transition costs for each option

The impacts on the BAU costs

Quantified benefits associated with each

option

A summary of NPV / ROI calculations across

the options

Optimism bias applied to the options

Sensitivity analysis undertaken against the

options

The following points apply to this section of the

Economic Case:

A conservative approach has been taken in the

quantitative assessment across:

o Cost estimating

o Benefits definition

o Variable and assumption

definition

As such the quantitative assessment reflects a

conservative outlook of cost, risk and benefits.

This is particularly true for Option 5, where the

realisation of cashable benefits has been

intentionally staggered, until such time as a

detailed schedule emerges.

The data sources used in the economic

assessment are detailed in Appendix B

The assessment presented within this

Economic Case has been calculated based on

an assumed 10-year funding cycle, herein the

‘appraisal period’.

Numerous variables have been defined and

assumptions made, to support the quantitative

analysis, including:

Global variables and assumptions that

support each option (including the ‘do

nothing’)

Demand projections per crime type

Assumptions on:

Fingerprint Bureaux

Traditional Labs

Digital Labs (including the tiered digital

model)

FSPs

CSIs

Other staff

These variables and assumptions are

documented in the Transforming Forensics

Economic Case Assumptions and Variables45

document.

OPTION 1 – MAINTAIN SERVICE CONTINUITY / THE ‘DO NOTHING’

Option 1 ‘Maintain Service Continuity’ represents

the ‘do nothing’ option for the Transforming

Forensics programme and assumes that forces

will manage the migration from IDENT1 to HOB

themselves. It is used as a baseline for

comparison of the costs and benefits of Options 2

to 5 in the Economic Case.

The total costs for this option are estimated at

£3,699.50M in discounted terms over the

appraisal period (2017/18 – 2026/27).

These costs have been estimated based on data

captured from force visits carried out between

December 2016 and January 2017, and

questionnaire returns across 24 forces in

England, Wales and Northern Ireland, with

additional data from BTP and the NCA, to

determine spend on forensics, volumes of activity,

standard operating procedures and outcomes.

The data collected has been supplemented by

data from the Home Office ADR, a 2016 digital

forensics questionnaire sent to all forces in

England, Wales Northern Ireland, BTP and NCA,

FMIT, Home Office Science - CAST and CIPFA.

5 Transforming Forensics Economic Case

Assumptions and Variables

OFFICIAL


April 2017

These data sets have been used to estimate total

forensic spend for each force, using a multiple

linear regression analysis extrapolation approach

to estimate data for each of the forces not

included in the sample. This results in a total

spend figure across the 44 police forces in

England, Wales and Northern Ireland, as well as

BTP and the NCA of c£363.35M in 2016/17. This

excludes spend on Information Technology (IT)

devices and software, which has been estimated

as a further cost of £20.50M

This total figure represents the “as-is” state of

police forensics spend and encompasses spend

on staff, estates, consumables, IT and software,

logistics and training across:

Traditional forensics:

Finger print bureaux

Finger print Enhancement Laboratories

Footwear bureaux

DNA and Drugs laboratories

Digital forensics from forensic department

budgets and non-forensic departments such

as:

High Tech Crime Units (HTCUs)

Cyber Crime Units (CCUs)

Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence.

Forensic Service Providers (FSPs)

Crime Scene Investigation (CSI)

Logistics

Leadership and management

Quality management, including accreditation

Commercial

IT Service Management (ITSM)

Future costs have been extrapolated from the “as-

is” data, taking account of:

predicted trends in forensic

submissions/exhibits provided by the Home

Office and the resources required to meet

these volumes;

expected improvements in the accuracy of the

new HOB strategic matcher for fingerprints.

The investment costs required for forces to

migrate to HOB have also been captured within

the future costs. These future costs are

summarised in Figure 1 below:

Figure 12: Extrapolated Forensic Spend across Forces in England, Wales, PSNI, BTP & NCA

Whilst there are numerous initiatives and proof of

concepts currently in progress, Option 1 assumes

that FSUs will continue under ‘business as usual’

with no uptake of emerging technologies like rapid

finger print and rapid DNA matching (except for

the Met and Greater Manchester Police that have

already contracted for rapid Fingerprint

technology, therefore these costs have been

included).

The known improvements delivered through the

wider HOB implementation have been included

and are summarised in the table below. The costs

associated with these improvements have also

been factored in to the ‘do nothing’ baseline:

OFFICIAL


April 2017

Area Outcome Qualitative Benefits

CASEWORK

FP Bureaux

upgrade

IDENT1 is switched out for the

HOB Strategic Matcher

Implementation of new Matcher

tools, including an improved digital

fingerprint mark up and analysis

capability

Tooling being available via the

force IT systems (not a separate

IDENT1 terminal).

Portal access to tooling to enable

remote working

Service continuity is

maintained and relatively

low disruption compared to

other options

More / more accurate

identifications obtained

resulting from the new

tooling

DNA upgrade Automation of NDU identification

processes

Quicker DNA identifications

Facilitates a reduction in

staff numbers

Enables 24/7 operation –

requiring no staff for

straightforward

identifications

Figure 13: Anticipated Outcomes and Benefits Associated with the ‘do nothing’

It is assumed that the costs for traditional

forensics will decline over time due to the

predicted decrease in traditional forensics

submissions/exhibits (which drive costs)

The anticipated rise in digital forensics

submissions/exhibits is anticipated to increase the

overall cost of forensics, as budgets will need to

increase to meet demand under existing

arrangements.

If the current approach to conducting digital

forensics continues, it would be inconceivable that

budgets could mitigate an ever increasing back

log of devices that need examining. Therefore, an

artificial cap on digital spending has been

modelled. Furthermore, it is acknowledged that

owing to a lack of a coherent process for

capturing digital forensics performance data, the

true spend is believed to be significantly greater

than declared.

The digital forensic costs are summarised in

Figure 3 below:

£-

£20

£40

£60

£80

£100

£120

£140

£160

£180

2015/16 2017/18 2019/20 2021/22 2023/24 2025/26

Millio

ns

Cost of Digital Forensics in England, Wales and NI

Digital Forensics Cost Cost of Backlog

Figure 14: Extrapolated Cost of Digital Forensics

OFFICIAL


April 2017

The ‘do nothing’ option perpetuates the current

fragmented approach to forensic delivery and

while there may be some piecemeal

improvements, such as further collaboration of

forensic delivery between forces, these have not

been included in the Option 1 estimate.

OPTION 2 – UTILISING ENABLERS

The table below summarises the main transition /

change areas associated with Option 2 and the

associated outcomes with anticipated benefits.

Text in italics represents additional outcomes and

benefits for this option that are not present in

Option 1, for the associated area:


NON-CASEWORK

Improved

coordination

between

forces

A small number of individuals

resourced to support coordination

between forces in the areas of

R&D, Marketplace, Quality

Management, Forensics Expertise

and Policy

Implementation of collaboration and

knowledge sharing tools

Improved knowledge

sharing

Reduction of duplication of

effort, particularly in areas of

R&D, procurement and

accreditation

Central

enabling

technology

Forensic cloud and single sign on,

providing a single point of access to

multiple forensic systems (including

forensic case management

systems, imaging and the National

Footwear Database)

Enables more efficient

working through ease of use

of IT and sharing of data

Project and

programme

delivery

Centrally managed programme

delivery, PMO and business

change, to manage the delivery of

the change associated with the

Fingerprint Bureaux

Projects and programmes

delivered right first time in

the most efficient way

Change is adopted with

minimum disruption

CASEWORK

FP Bureaux

upgrade



Implementation of new matcher



capability


force IT systems, not a separate

IDENT1 terminal.


remote working

Common FP process implemented

across all FP Bureaux




other options



resulting from the new

tooling

Common working practices

facilitate continual service

improvement and minimise

the change effort required

Enable FP Bureaux to

distribute workload to meet

capacity spikes, out of hours

working (24x7), and

manage large scale DR

scenarios

Figure 15: Anticipated Outcomes and Benefits Associated with Option 2

OFFICIAL


April 2017

The following provides a summary of the key

costs and benefits associated with Option 2, over

the appraisal period – all of these figures are

discounted:

The forensic delivery costs and IT costs are

£3,672.54M, representing a saving of £26.95M

against the ‘do nothing’ baseline, because of:

Savings expected from standardising

fingerprint processing across forces.

Savings resulting from streamlining the

approach to implementing the HOB

changes across forces via a business

change programme.

The additional investment costs required are

£7.54M

The additional technical delivery costs are

£18.52M

The total costs for Option 2 are therefore

£3,698.60M

The monetised benefits associated with Option

2 are:

The number of exhibit processing days

saved in SSUs (as a result of implementing

common Fingerprint practices), which

results in a £80.73M benefit to police

investigations

The resultant Economic NPV for Option 2 is

£81.63M over the appraisal period

The table on the following page summarises this

data, and presents the NPV in both discounted

and undiscounted terms for Option 2.

OFFICIAL


April 2017

Option 2 (all values in £M)

Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

FY 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27

Discount Rate 1.00 0.97 0.93 0.90 0.87 0.84 0.81 0.79 0.76 0.73 Totals

Un

dis

co

un

ted

Forensic Delivery Costs 384.36 393.53 412.20 412.17 412.17 412.17 412.17 412.17 412.17 412.17 4075.30

Existing IT Delivery Costs 21.60 20.02 19.51 19.51 19.51 19.51 19.51 19.51 19.51 19.51 197.66

Investment Costs 4.17 3.21 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.66

Add. Tech. Delivery Costs 0.00 2.73 4.04 2.12 2.12 2.12 2.12 2.12 2.12 2.12 21.62

Total Costs 410.12 419.50 436.02 433.80 433.80 433.80 433.80 433.80 433.80 433.80 4302.25

Financial NPV -0.75 -2.34 0.35 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.63 1.65

Financial ROI 1.06

Benefits 0.00 0.00 12.16 12.16 12.16 12.16 12.16 12.16 12.16 12.16 97.24

Economic NPV -0.75 -2.34 12.50 12.78 12.78 12.78 12.78 12.78 12.78 12.78 98.89

Economic ROI 4.38

Dis

co

un

ted





Total Costs 410.12 405.31 407.03 391.26 378.03 365.25 352.90 340.96 329.43 318.29 3698.60

Financial NPV -0.75 -2.26 0.32 0.57 0.55 0.53 0.51 0.49 0.48 0.46 0.90

Financial ROI 1.03

Benefits 0.00 0.00 11.35 10.96 10.59 10.23 9.89 9.55 9.23 8.92 80.73

Economic NPV -0.75 -2.26 11.67 11.53 11.14 10.76 10.40 10.05 9.71 9.38 81.63

Economic ROI 4.13

Figure 16: Option 2 quantitative assessment summary

OFFICIAL


April 2017

OPTION 3 – MAXIMISE THE NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE





benefits for this option, that are not present in

Options 1 and 2, for the associated area.


NON-CASEWORK

Improved

coordination

between

forces

Teams in place to support

coordination between forces in the

areas of R&D, Marketplace, Quality

Management, Forensic Expertise

and Policy.

Implementation of collaboration

and knowledge sharing tools

Improved knowledge sharing

Reduction of duplication of

effort, particularly in areas of

R&D, procurement and

accreditation

Enabling

services

SMEs to set up a centre of

excellence around skills,

experience and training

Dedicated resource to support

forces with the accreditation

challenge, supported by a Quality

Management System (QMS)

Resources to capture the status of

R&D work in progress, as well as a

pipeline plan of desired work

Centrally provided support on

procurement, facilitated by a

procurement portal, to deliver

enabling:

o Systems, e.g. work

management, tasking;

o Devices, e.g. RapidDNA,

RapidFP, Rapid Footwear,

DF kiosks, DF Triage tools,

digital scene capture tools;

o Infrastructure, e.g. common

mobile platforms, telecoms

connectivity

Uses expertise centrally for

the benefit of all, whilst

minimising effort

Drives the adoption of

innovation to more effectively

address current and future

forensic needs

Drives consistency across

forces in the approach to

delivering forensic casework

Enables a more focused

approach to delivering R&D

by the forces

Supports prioritisation of

work

Central

enabling

technology






Footwear Database)

Oversee specification and delivery

of supporting technology and

infrastructure, e.g. devices, apps on

devices, APIs




Enables new capability for

users

Project and

programme

delivery

Centrally managed programme

delivery, PMO and business

change, to manage delivery of the

change associated with the FP

Bureaux and enabling services

Projects and programmes

delivered right first time in the

most efficient way

Change is adopted with

minimum disruption


OFFICIAL


April 2017


costs and benefit attributes associated with

Option 3, over the appraisal period – all of these

figures are discounted:


£3,631.53M, representing a decrease of

£67.97M against the ‘do nothing’ baseline,

because of:

Increased savings expected in digital FSP

spend due to better co-ordination of

marketplace

Increased savings expected from collective

kit and consumables purchasing for CSIs


£8.32M


£92.73M


£3,732.57M


3 are £144.25M



common finger print practices)

The additional number of exhibit processing

days saved in SSUs (as a result of rapid

Fingerprint and DNA technology available

to more forces)

These lead to efficiencies in police

investigations

The resultant Economic NPV for Option 3

is £111.17M over the appraisal period




OFFICIAL


April 2017


Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

FY 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27


Un

dis

co

un

ted





Total Costs 410.40 436.11 444.03 434.22 434.22 437.48 435.85 435.85 435.85 435.85 4339.85

Financial NPV -1.03 -18.95 -7.66 0.21 0.21 -3.05 -1.42 -1.42 -1.42 -1.42 -35.95

Financial ROI 0.69

Benefits 0.00 0.00 13.41 13.41 13.41 27.43 27.43 27.43 27.43 27.43 177.40

Economic NPV -1.03 -18.95 5.76 13.62 13.62 24.38 26.01 26.01 26.01 26.01 141.45

Economic ROI 2.21

Dis

co

un

ted





Total Costs 410.40 421.36 414.50 391.64 378.40 368.35 354.56 342.57 330.99 319.80 3732.57

Financial NPV -1.03 -18.31 -7.15 0.19 0.18 -2.57 -1.16 -1.12 -1.08 -1.04 -33.08

Financial ROI 0.67

Benefits 0.00 0.00 12.52 12.10 11.69 23.10 22.32 21.56 20.83 20.13 144.25

Economic NPV -1.03 -18.31 5.37 12.29 11.87 20.53 21.16 20.44 19.75 19.09 111.17

Economic ROI 2.10


OFFICIAL


April 2017

OPTION 4 – AGGREGATE FORENSIC SERVICES





benefits for this option, for the associated area,

that are not present in Options 1-3, for the

associated area:


NON-CASEWORK

Central

enabling

technology

Note: NOT

limited to

back-end

services






Footwear Database)

Oversee specification and delivery

of supporting technology and

infrastructure, e.g. devices, apps on

devices, APIs

A national forensic portal to support

access to multiple forensic systems

including digital forensic image and

video processing, scene

reconstruction services, and more

flexible access to national data

services like the National Footwear

Database




Enables new capability for

users

Enables staff to gain access

to wider sets of information

from one place to improve

efficiency in delivery

Capability

development

Note: LIMITED

to back-end

services

Introduction of new capability at the super-

regional level:

A training capability will be

established that will only provide

training on the back-end services

Similarly an R&D capability will be

set up to investigate opportunities

as captured in the R&D pipeline

register, but in areas of the back-

end services only

Delivers alignment and

consistency in working

practices for back-end

services

Fewer training centres

needing to make changes

when top down direction is

provided

Fewer forces delivering

R&D separately in an

uncoordinated manner

CASEWORK

FP Bureaux

upgrade



Implementation of new matcher



capability


force IT systems, not a separate

IDENT1 terminal.


remote working

Consolidation of all FP Bureaux

within the super-region, requiring all

staff within the super-region to




other options



resultant from the new

tooling

Common working practices

to facilitate continual service

improvement and minimise

the change effort required

More cost effective delivery

of out of hours working

OFFICIAL


April 2017

adopt a single common FP process

within the super-region

Consolidation

of back-end

forensic

services in

super-regions

Back end facilities owned by new

super-regions to be realigned to

deliver industrialised quality and

throughput

Experts available to provide scene

support services from the in scope

back-end forensic disciplines

Introduction of fast-labs to provide

Rapid Forensic capability to those

that need them, whilst driving

innovation in the area

Technology need to deliver the

aforementioned services

Delivers back-end casework

services in a more efficient

manner, to reduce the time

to gaining an identification,

including offering a 24/7

service

Quality raised to the highest

performing levels with

consistent service delivery

Focus on meeting the needs

of complex and emerging

crimes

Better use of sunk costs

around labs and equipment

Offers Rapid Forensic

services for time critical

requirements

Improves the victim

experience where Rapid

Forensics is used, by

receiving a result sooner,

with equipment confiscated

for shorter periods of time

Drives innovation around

Rapid Forensics

Consolidation

of identity

resolution

services

Super-region level activity:

Consolidation of Footwear Bureaux

Introduction of Face, Scars / Marks

/ Tattoos and Patterns bureaux

FP Bureaux (covered above)

DNA not in scope for this option

Consistency in how face,

footwear, scars, marks,

tattoos and pattern

matching is provided at a

super-regional level

A wider forensic identity

picture is created to support

investigations.

Enables best practice to be

deployed around the

introduction of new or for

growing forensic disciplines

e.g. Face.







£3,258.56M, representing a saving of


because of:

Increased savings expected in digital and

traditional FSP spend due to consolidated

procurement co-ordination



due to consolidated procurement co-

ordination

Staff savings due to consolidation and

increased efficiencies

Savings in premises/accreditation due to

consolidation

Savings in coordination of some logistics

methods

Reduction in the cost of the digital backlog

due to:

OFFICIAL


April 2017

Increased efficiencies

Using the tiered digital model

Improved digital FSP agreements


£96.86M


£290.71M


£3,646.13M


4 are £128.52M from:



common practices in all disciplines when

consolidating)

The additional number of exhibit processing


fingerprint and DNA technology available to

more forces)


investigations.






OFFICIAL


April 2017


Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

FY 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27


Un

dis

co

un

ted





Total Costs 411.97 491.39 500.98 476.31 478.79 497.62 334.33 332.63 332.63 326.91 4183.57

Financial NPV -2.59 -74.23 -64.61 -41.88 -44.37 -63.19 100.10 101.79 101.79 107.52 120.34

Financial ROI 0.69

Benefits 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.56 41.56 41.56 41.56 166.22

Economic NPV -2.59 -74.23 -64.61 -41.88 -44.37 -63.19 141.66 143.35 143.35 149.07 286.56

Economic ROI 2.21

Dis

co

un

ted





Total Costs 411.97 474.77 467.67 429.60 417.24 418.99 271.98 261.45 252.61 239.86 3646.13

Financial NPV -2.59 -71.72 -60.32 -37.77 -38.66 -53.21 81.43 80.01 77.30 78.89 53.36

Financial ROI 0.67

Benefits 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.81 32.66 31.56 30.49 128.52

Economic NPV -2.59 -71.72 -60.32 -37.77 -38.66 -53.21 115.24 112.67 108.86 109.38 181.88

Economic ROI 1.47


OFFICIAL


April 2017

OPTION 5 – FULL FORENSIC INTEGRATION





benefits for this option, that are not present in

Options 1-4, for the associated area:


NON-CASEWORK

Enabling

central

services

Ethos of best practices and shared skills / experiences

Dedicated resource to support forces with the accreditation challenge, supported by a Quality Management System (QMS)

Resources to capture the status of R&D work in progress, as well as a pipeline plan of desired work

Centrally provided support on procurement, facilitated by a procurement portal, to deliver enabling:

o Systems, e.g. work management, tasking;

o Devices, e.g. RapidDNA, RapidFP, Rapid Footwear, DF kiosks, DF Triage tools, digital scene capture tools; and,

o Infrastructure, e.g. common mobile platforms, telecoms connectivity

Management to run the service and deliver it to the service levels, identify areas for improvement, and deliver the improvements

Uses expertise centrally for the benefit of all, whilst minimising effort

Drives the adoption of innovation to more effectively address current and future forensic needs

Drives consistency across forces in the approach to delivering forensic casework

Enables a more focused approach to delivering R&D by the forces

Supports prioritisation of work

More effective workforce from access to the knowledge needed

Clear understanding of targets and performance against targets

Delivery of service to within the service level targets

Efficient allocation of areas for reinvestment of savings

Central

enabling

technology

Forensic cloud and single sign on, providing a single point of access to multiple forensic systems (including forensic case management systems, imaging and the National Footwear Database)

Oversee specification and delivery of supporting technology and infrastructure, e.g. devices, apps on devices, APIs

A national forensic portal to support access to multiple forensic systems including digital forensic image and video processing, scene reconstruction services, and more flexible access to national data services like the National Footwear Database

Remote access to scenes via 4G for:

o Multi-channel live video

Enables more efficient working through ease of use of IT and sharing of data

Enables new capability for users

Enables staff to gain access to wider sets of information from one place to improve efficiency in delivery

Better enables products to be tailored for the CJS, such as SFRs and digital casefiles

New tooling enables performance to be measured effectively, hence enabling continual service improvement

Fewer experts needed physically at the scene due to remote access

OFFICIAL


April 2017

streaming o Control of scene

technology

Strategic forensic work management system that features:

o Central record access and storage

o Case workflow and decision support

o Casework reporting for the CJS, e.g. SFRs

o Self-service access for victims for information about their forensic case

Consolidation of forensic databases such as DNA, NABIS and CAID

Minimising delays due to downtime between hand-offs

Better victim experience due to ability to easily understand progress with their forensic case

Capability

development

Introduction of new capability at a

national level:

A training capability will be established that will only provide training on all forensic services

Similarly an R&D capability will be set up to investigate opportunities as captured in the R&D pipeline register

Delivers alignment and consistent in working practices for all forensic services

Fewer training centres needing to make changes when top down direction is provided

Fewer forces delivering R&D separately in an uncoordinated manner

CASEWORK

FP Bureaux

upgrade

IDENT1 is switched out for the HOB Strategic Matcher

Implementation of new matcher tools, including an improved digital fingerprint mark up and analysis capability

Tooling being available via the force IT systems, not a separate IDENT1 terminal.

Portal access to tooling to enable remote working

Consolidation of all FP Bureaux, requiring all staff to adopt a single common FP process

Service continuity is maintained and relatively low disruption compared to other options

More / more accurate identifications obtained resulting from the new tooling

Common working practices facilitate continual service improvement and minimise the change effort required

Enable FP Bureaux to distribute workload to meet capacity spikes, out of hours working (24/7), and manage large scale DR scenarios

Migration to a

single

national

forensics

delivery

operating

model

Rollout of operating model that includes:

A common triage model that meets policing needs across the spectrum from local to international

Back end facilities to be realigned to deliver industrialised quality and throughput

Experts available to provide scene support services for all

Delivers back-end casework services in a more efficient manner, to reduce the time to gaining an identification, including offering a 24/7 service

Quality raised to the highest performing levels with consistent service delivery

OFFICIAL


April 2017

forensic disciplines

Introduction of fastlabs to process rapid casework services

New scene work operating models introduced that incorporate Rapid Forensics, including RapidDNA, RapidFP, RapidFootwear, and DF kiosks at or near the scene

Introduction of a new logistics service

Provision of self-service guidance for those impacted by crime

Services specified to meet the varying needs, i.e. volume crime through complex and emerging crime

Better use of sunk costs around labs and equipment

Offers Rapid Forensics services for time critical requirements, both in hubs and at/near the scene

Improves the victim experience where Rapid Forensics is used, by receiving a result sooner, with equipment confiscated for shorter periods of time

Drives innovation on Rapid Forensics

More cost effective processing of exhibits

Better triage of scene attendance, exhibit collection, forensic development and analysis prioritisation, selection of DF processing type, and data to access from the exhibit

Less time lost through moving exhibits around due to improved logistics

Provides opportunities for improved detections from information provided to people impacted by crime

Consolidation

of identity

resolution

services

National activity to set up the Identity

Resolution Service:

Consolidation of Footwear Bureaux

Introduction of Face, Scars / Marks / Tattoos and Patterns bureaux

FP Bureaux (covered above)

Migration of the DNA identification service (NDU) into the Identity Resolution Service

Consistency in how face, footwear, scars, marks, tattoos and pattern matching is provided

An holistic forensic identity picture is created to support investigations.

Enables best practice to be deployed around the introduction of new or for growing forensic disciplines e.g. Face.

Investigator

process

Investigate the impact of Rapid Forensics on the investigator’s process

Identify changes needed to maximise the benefits to be realised by transforming the forensics domain

INTELLIGENCE

Forensic

intelligence

A national forensic intelligence service set up to identify trends across cases and forensic

Better identification of trends and people networks that occur across

OFFICIAL


April 2017

service disciplines

Tooling to facilitate intelligence acquisition

force boundaries, cases and forensic disciplines

Better identification of emerging threats and needs







£3,083.66M, representing a saving of


because of:

Increased savings expected in digital and

traditional FSP spend due to consolidated

procurement co-ordination



due to consolidated procurement co-

ordination

Staff savings due to consolidation &

increased efficiencies

Savings in premises/accreditation due to

consolidation

Savings in coordination of some logistics

vehicles

Reduction in the cost of digital backlog due:

Increased efficiencies

Using the tiered digital model

Improved digital FSP agreements


£85.21M


£296.46M


£3,465.34M


5 are £151.97M

A number of exhibit processing days saved

in SSUs (as a result of implementing

common practices in all disciplines when

consolidating)

An additional number of exhibit processing


fingerprint and DNA technology available to

more forces)


investigations

Increased CSI productivity - more efficient

and collaborative tasking of CSIs means

that travel time is reduced and more crime

scenes can be attended






OFFICIAL


April 2017


Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

FY 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27


Un

dis

co

un

ted





Total Costs 412.67 490.67 498.37 474.73 446.23 462.17 297.32 293.54 293.32 288.74 3957.74

Financial NPV -3.29 -73.51 -62.00 -40.30 -11.80 -27.74 137.11 140.89 141.11 145.69 346.16

Financial ROI 1.79

Benefits 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.74 7.43 44.09 44.09 44.09 44.09 194.53

Economic NPV -3.29 -73.51 -62.00 -40.30 -1.06 -20.31 181.20 184.98 185.20 189.78 540.69

Economic ROI 2.23

Dis

co

un

ted





Total Costs 412.67 474.08 465.23 428.17 388.86 389.13 241.87 230.72 222.75 211.85 3465.34

Financial NPV -3.29 -71.03 -57.87 -36.35 -10.28 -23.36 111.54 110.74 107.16 106.90 234.16

Financial ROI 1.61

Benefits 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.36 6.26 35.87 34.65 33.48 32.35 151.97

Economic NPV -3.29 -71.03 -57.87 -36.35 -0.92 -17.10 147.41 145.39 140.64 139.25 386.13

Economic ROI 2.01


OFFICIAL


SUMMARY OF OPTIONS 2 TO 5 - QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS

The summary of the BAU Cost Calculations, per option, is presented below in both discounted and

undiscounted terms. This summary is prior to any optimism bias or sensitivity analysis.

Option 2

Option 3

Undiscounted

£M

Discounted

£M

Undiscounted

£M

Discounted

£M

Forensic Delivery Costs 4075.30 3502.05

4029.32 3464.25

Existing IT Delivery Costs 197.66 170.49

193.81 167.28

Investment Costs 7.66 7.54

8.47 8.32

Add. Tech. Delivery Costs 21.62 18.52

108.26 92.73

Total Costs 4302.25 3698.60

4339.85 3732.57

Financial NPV 1.65 0.90

-35.95 -33.08

Financial ROI 1.06 1.03

0.69 0.67

Benefits 97.24 80.73

177.40 144.25

Economic NPV 98.89 81.63

141.45 111.17

Economic ROI 4.38 4.13

2.21 2.10

Option 4

Option 5

Undiscounted

£M

Discounted

£M

Undiscounted

£M

Discounted

£M

Forensic Delivery Costs 3552.97 3099.69

3343.72 2931.91

Existing IT Delivery Costs 182.84 158.87

173.90 151.75

Investment Costs 109.35 96.86

95.58 85.21

Add. Tech. Delivery Costs 338.42 290.71

344.54 296.46

Total Costs 4183.57 3646.13

3957.74 3465.34

Financial NPV 120.34 53.36

346.16 234.16

Financial ROI 1.27 1.14

1.79 1.61

Benefits 166.22 128.52

194.53 151.97

Economic NPV 286.56 181.88

540.69 386.13

Economic ROI 1.64 1.47

2.23 2.01

Figure 23: Summary of Option Costs

Prior to any optimism bias or sensitivity analysis it

is therefore shown that Option 5 presents the best

NPV through the quantitative analysis associated

with the Economic Case.

SUMMARY OF KEY QUALITATIVE BENEFITS

At this point of the assessment it is worth

documenting the significant qualitative benefits

that would be realised as a result of the

implementation of a Transforming Forensics

Programme. These, as well as the anticipated

quantitative benefits, as detailed in this section,

provide a compelling case for transformational

change:

Quicker investigations as a consequence of

forensic analysis results being returned

quicker.

An increase in the number of detections due to

results being available more expediently.

Increase in guilty pleas, reducing resource and

cost intensive non- guilty pleas and associated

impacts to policing.

This has the potential to reduce

submissions where earlier guilty pleas

mean less additional evidence needs to be

processed.

Criminals are more likely to plead guilty

when faced with rapid forensic results.

OFFICIAL


Quicker apprehension of criminals resulting in

fewer offences committed by reoffenders.

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

The Green Book Supplementary Guidance on

Public Sector Business Cases6 states that

“Sensitivity analysis is fundamental to appraisal. It

is used to test the vulnerability of options to

unavoidable future uncertainties and to test the

robustness of the ranking of the options. It

involves testing the ranking of the options by

changing some of the key assumptions.”

One of the fundamental assumptions made in

defining the baseline positon / ‘do nothing’ (as

described in the Baseline Definition section of this

document) was to include 46 forces within the

modelling activity. Whilst this is a valid assumption

from a modelling perspective and enables side-

by-side comparisons / evaluations to be made

throughout the option assessment, in reality it is

unlikely that all forces would form together as a

‘cohort’ and participate in Transforming Forensics.

In addition to the above, as described in the

Quantitative Analysis section, numerous

assumptions and variables were defined in order

to model the options as presented in the

Economic Case. These assumptions and

variables are defined in the Transforming

Forensics Economic Case Assumptions and

Variables7 document.

Given that these assumptions and variables are

key to the analysis presented, it is important to

subject them to sensitivity analysis in order to

confirm the viability of each option. Therefore,

eight scenarios were created, upon which the

options were analysed:

1. High level participation of 46 forces

against a baseline set of assumptions and

variables.

2. High level participation of 46 forces

against a pessimistic set of assumptions

and variables.

6https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/

uploads/attachment_data/file/469317/green_book_guidance_public_sector_business_cases_2015_update.pdf 7 Transforming Forensics Economic Case

Assumptions and Variable

3. High level participation of 45 forces (as

per item 1 above, but excluding the Met

Police) against a baseline set of

assumptions and variables.

4. High level participation of 45 forces (as

per item 1 above, but excluding the Met

Police) against a pessimistic set of

assumptions and variables.

5. Medium level participation of 28 forces


variables.

6. Medium level participation of 28 forces


and variables.

7. Low level participation of 20 forces


variables.

8. Low level participation of 20 forces


and variables.

The Economic NPV for the sensitivity analysis, as

defined by these scenarios, is summarised in the

table on the next page.





OFFICIAL


Option 2

- C Option 2

- P Option 3

- C Option 3

- P Option 4

- C Option 4

- P Option 5

- C Option 5

- P

46 Forces

81.63 74.55 111.17 101.03 181.88 103.23 386.13 272.62

45 Forces

75.17 69.41 106.61 98.36 103.08 31.52 276.98 175.64

28 Forces

44.45 41.82 70.16 66.40 -22.76 -63.64 104.69 32.04

20 Forces

32.55 31.14 45.19 43.18 -29.29 -60.46 79.44 18.79

* All NPV Values in discounted Terms

Figure 24: Summary of the Sensitivity Analysis

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS – CONCLUSIONS

The following key conclusions can be drawn from

this analysis, broken down per option below:

Option 5 presents the strongest economic NPV

by a significant margin in the majority of

scenarios.

The economic NPV for Option 5 drops in the

28 and 20 force scenarios against the

pessimistic variables, therefore the in the FBC

phase:

the selected force cohort should be re-

modelled against this baseline, to confirm

the economic NPV and assumptions

against it

particular attention should be paid to the

size and mix of the forces within the cohort,

as the economic NPV will vary against

these factors

Option 4 presents a reasonable NPV in the 46

force scenario, but the NPV quickly diminishes

to a negative number as the cohort size drops.

On this basis, with anything less than a full

take up of Option 4 across forces, the benefits

diminish significantly.

Option 2 and option 3 remain positive across

the force cohort scenarios, however these are

relatively low positive values when compared

to Options 4 and 5.

OPTIMISM BIAS

In all aspects of the Economic Case a

conservative approach has been taken to

modelling and assessing the data, this includes

(but is not limited):

Creating realistic design options that are

underpinned by realistic assumptions and

drivers (e.g. current technology or technology

that lays within near term development road

maps).

Approaching the extrapolation of forensic

spend in a conservative manner, from which

the ‘do nothing’ and option baselines were

established.

Only claiming cashable benefits for items that

can be defined with certainty.

Time phasing the delivery of cashable and

non-cashable benefits such that a benefit is

only realised in the financial year after its

delivery project has completed.

However, whilst the sensitivity analysis tested the

vulnerability of the options with regards to the

potential make-up of forces within the cohort, no

adjustment was made to the forensic delivery

costs or the delivery / technical costs inherent

within the options.

The supplementary guidance to the HM Treasury

Green Book Guidance8 states that “there is a

demonstrated, systematic, tendency for project

appraisers to be overly optimistic. To redress this

tendency appraisers should make explicit,

empirically based adjustments to the estimates of

a project’s costs, benefits, and duration”.

8

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/191507/Optimism_bias.pdf




OFFICIAL


Therefore, the HM Treasury Green Book

Guidance on Optimism Bias Upper Guidance for

Equipment / Development and Outsourcing

Projects (table 4 in the referenced article) was

used as a template against which delivery and

BAU costs were assessed. The completed table,

detailing the optimism bounds used against

Option 5, is detailed in Appendix E.

The following optimism bounds were applied to

the costs and benefits associated with Option 5:

Investment costs increased by 52% (i.e. the cost

to deliver Option 5 was increased by 52%). This

potential increase in cost was assessed as being

predominantly driven by:

1. the design complexity of Option 5;

2. the large number of stakeholders

involved;

3. the potential political angle associated

with Option 5.

The increase to the investment costs was applied

over the duration of the appraisal period.

Applying these bounds to Option 5 results in

updated totals which can be seen on the next

page. In total £198.47M, in discounted terms, is

added to the delivery cost of the programme,

owing to the optimism bias calculations.

OFFICIAL



Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

FY 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27


Un

dis

co

un

ted





Total Costs 416.16 530.77 532.32 500.10 466.94 492.16 318.25 312.51 312.18 305.21 4186.60

Financial NPV -6.78 -113.61 -95.95 -65.67 -32.51 -57.73 116.17 121.92 122.25 129.22 117.30

Financial ROI 1.18

Benefits 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.74 7.43 44.09 44.09 44.09 44.09 194.53

Economic NPV -6.78 -113.61 -95.95 -65.67 -21.78 -50.30 160.26 166.01 166.34 173.31 311.83

Economic ROI 1.47

Dis

co

un

ted





Total Costs 416.16 512.82 496.93 451.06 406.91 414.38 258.90 245.63 237.07 223.94 3663.81

Financial NPV -6.78 -109.76 -89.57 -59.23 -28.33 -48.61 94.51 95.83 92.84 94.81 35.69

Financial ROI 1.06

Benefits 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.36 6.26 35.87 34.65 33.48 32.35 151.97

Economic NPV -6.78 -109.76 -89.57 -59.23 -18.98 -42.35 130.37 130.48 126.32 127.16 187.66

Economic ROI 1.32

Figure 25: Cost and Benefit Breakdown for Option 5 Optimism Bias Results

This breakdown shows that, even with significant bias loaded into the investment and running costs associated with Option 5, the option still returns a positive, albeit

diminished, NPV over the appraisal period.

OFFICIAL


QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT

INTRODUCTION

To obtain a qualitative evaluation of the options

proposed within the OBC, the Transforming

Forensics project team engaged with the Forensic

Leaders at the Forensic Leaders Conference

(FLC), held at the College of Policing, Ryton on

the 14th March 2017.

The OBC project team developed a questionnaire

which queried the leaders on which option was

best positioned to deliver the benefits. Each of the

options was presented to the Forensic Leaders,

who were then asked to score the options in their

questionnaire response.

The FLC consisted of circa 45 key forensic

personnel from various forces across England,

Wales and Northern Ireland. The approach to

undertaking this assessment, and the responses

received, are detailed within this section.

APPROACH

A questionnaire was developed by the

Transforming Forensics team and consisted of 22

strategic questions to assess each of the options

based on the following four categories. These

categories are tied to the key programme benefits

that it is anticipated the options shall deliver:

1. Delivery – does the option achieve the

programme’s goals?

2. Strategic fit – does the option support

police and government stakeholders’

strategies?

3. Feasibility – can the option be

implemented in a timely an acceptable

manner?

4. Acceptability – Is the option acceptable

(to key stakeholders)?

Figure 26: Questionnaire template embedded & snapshot of the questionnaire

The Forensic Leaders were walked through each

question such that they fully understood what was

being asked and its relevance to the anticipated

benefits and the options.

A scoring of 0 to 100 was applied to each

question, an entry of 0 and 100 was mandatory

against at least one of the options for each

question (0 = the option does not address the

OFFICIAL


question, 100 = the option addresses the

question). The Forensic Leaders were then free to

apply any score between 0 and 100 to the

remaining options.

At the end of the session the questionnaire

responses were collated such that an assessment

on the options could be undertaken.

ANALYSIS

Circa 35 responses were received from the FLC

attendees. These answers were then aggregated

and weighted such that an overall score could be

formed. The answers were weighted for the

following reasons:

Importance was placed on questions that

related to the scope and content of each

option, e.g. whether each option best enabled:

Service delivery

Adoption of regulation / accreditation

standards

Future proofing

Conversely Less emphasis was placed on

items that would not be (or become) the direct

accountability of the FLC forum, e.g.:

The deliverability of the option

The support the option provided to non-law

users

The acceptability of the option to wider /

external stakeholders.

From this, the below summary table was

produced:

Question - is this option / does it deliver Option

1 Option

2 Option

3 Option

4 Option

5 Weight

Transformational Q1 0.3 14.8 45.8 69.5 100.0 8.0%

Local & Forces Priorities Q2 40.9 55.2 68.6 63.4 45.9 2.0%

Forensic Support Q3 14.5 33.4 60.4 76.1 73.9 4.0%

Access to the service Q4 19.1 34.1 59.8 65.7 83.2 4.0%

Forensic Intelligence Q5 0.7 26.6 49.0 76.2 94.1 6.0%

Strategy formulation & service development Q6 4.7 23.3 55.3 79.7 94.0 8.0%

Regulation/Accreditation & standards Q7 8.8 27.2 51.0 78.4 89.3 9.0%

Future Proof Q8 0.0 23.8 47.5 75.3 96.3 8.0%

Service resilience Q9 17.2 31.0 53.0 71.0 73.0 6.0%

Staff Recruitment & Retention Q10 32.3 45.7 53.2 64.7 53.0 3.0%

Support FSP Market Q11 19.7 28.8 52.8 76.7 73.7 6.0%

Support CSJ & Courts service Q12 28.0 36.5 58.7 71.7 72.3 4.0%

Support non-law users Q13 11.0 33.0 52.2 76.7 92.0 2.0%

Fit Published Strategies Q14 17.2 39.0 50.7 77.1 80.0 6.0%

Build long term capability Q15 1.7 26.5 58.3 81.8 91.3 8.0%

Fit with wider policing Q16 27.9 37.9 68.3 69.2 55.0 4.0%

Can changes be implemented Q17 73.7 71.7 67.8 50.0 17.3 2.0%

Practical to manage & deliver Q18 56.7 66.7 72.3 53.1 37.2 2.0%

Acceptable to external stakeholders Q19 56.3 61.6 77.7 63.1 25.2 2.0%

Acceptable to internal stakeholders Q20 73.9 73.0 79.3 47.7 9.6 2.0%

Acceptable to industry/ext suppliers Q21 28.5 50.1 66.4 70.9 71.4 2.0%

Acceptable to wider stakeholders Q22 10.7 41.9 63.8 79.0 80.7 2.0%

Weighted Average

16.2 33.2 55.9 72.9 78.4

Figure 27: Summary Responses from the FLC Community

The method for calculating the weighted average

was to take the average response per question

by, adding the scores (ranging from 0 to 100) and

dividing by the number of responses. A weight %

was applied to each question which would be

multiplied by the average to provide the weighted

average. These weighted averages for each

OFFICIAL


question were added up to provide the overall

score for each of the options.

The output of this assessment shows that Option

5 was viewed as the preferred Option by the FLC

forum.

This questionnaire analysis was then re-analysed

for a subset of the FLC attendees. A portion of the

FLC attendees had participated as part of the

Expert Group to support the design of the options

themselves. It is therefore appropriate to assume

that these members had a better understanding of

the options presented (as they had been involved

in their creation).

By re-running the assessment against just the

responses received from the Expert Group

participants, and using the same weighting, the

following results were obtained:

Question - is this option / does it deliver Option

1 Option

2 Option

3 Option

4 Option

5 Weight

Transformational Q1 0.0 15.0 37.8 64.4 100.0 8.0%

Local & Forces Priorities Q2 17.2 44.4 64.4 65.6 72.2 2.0%

Forensic Support Q3 17.2 35.0 56.7 51.1 82.2 4.0%

Access to the service Q4 17.2 30.6 46.7 52.2 90.0 4.0%

Forensic Intelligence Q5 0.0 24.4 48.9 68.9 96.7 6.0%

Strategy formulation & service development Q6 0.0 20.6 44.4 74.4 97.8 8.0%

Regulation/Accreditation & standards Q7 12.8 20.0 51.7 67.2 88.9 9.0%

Future Proof Q8 0.0 14.4 38.9 51.1 100.0 8.0%

Service resilience Q9 12.8 25.0 44.4 61.1 77.8 6.0%

Staff Recruitment & Retention Q10 20.0 34.4 49.4 60.0 63.3 3.0%

Support FSP Market Q11 15.6 26.1 54.4 74.4 77.8 6.0%

Support CSJ & Courts service Q12 8.9 30.6 54.4 70.0 82.2 4.0%

Support non-law users Q13 3.3 48.9 49.4 78.9 98.9 2.0%

Fit Published Strategies Q14 2.2 27.8 50.0 70.6 91.1 6.0%

Build long term capability Q15 0.0 22.8 61.1 70.6 85.6 8.0%

Fit with wider policing Q16 16.7 33.3 66.7 61.7 73.3 4.0%

Can changes be implemented Q17 74.4 83.9 77.2 53.3 21.1 2.0%

Practical to manage & deliver Q18 45.6 59.4 72.2 50.0 47.2 2.0%

Acceptable to external stakeholders Q19 44.4 60.0 84.4 62.2 35.6 2.0%

Acceptable to internal stakeholders Q20 61.1 68.9 84.4 45.6 10.0 2.0%

Acceptable to industry/ext suppliers Q21 25.6 46.7 65.6 69.4 83.3 2.0%

Acceptable to wider stakeholders Q22 6.7 57.8 73.3 77.8 86.7 2.0%

Option

1 Option

2 Option

3 Option

4 Option

5

Weighted Average

12 29 53 65 83

Figure 28: Summary Responses from the FLC community members involved in the definition of the options

This analysis emphasises further the view that

Option 5 is best positioned to deliver against the

anticipated benefits, the views of the Expert

Group participants further reinforces this. Option 5

scored particularly highly on the ‘delivery’ and

‘strategic fit ‘criteria, which is important as these

sections cover the ability of the option to deliver

the programme goals and meet stakeholder

needs. Whilst Option 5 didn’t score as highly on

the feasibility and acceptability criteria, these are

aspects that can be mitigated as the programme

moves towards FBC (as opposed to the inherent

option design, which is fixed).

OFFICIAL


COMMERCIAL CONSIDERATIONS

The Forensic Science Strategy9 sets an ambition

for police forces to have a national approach to

forensic science delivery that will provide a more

strategic relationship with the forensic supply

chain. In anticipation of a Transforming Forensics

programme there is already strong momentum at

both regional and sub-regional level.

Recent major contract awards have introduced

new contract models, moving toward managed

service operations framed around broader

partnership working objectives. These

arrangements largely supersede the National

Forensic Framework-based approach of the last

nine years. Some of these deals are based on

well-developed regional structures that are

already creating a strong collaborative platform

within and around the existing National Forensic

Framework Agreements.

Option 5 (Full integration) is identified as offering

the greatest transformational benefit, including:

positively driving value for money through

standardisation, aggregation and collaboration;

maximum influence over the entire internal and

external forensic marketplace;

national adoption of enabling technologies and

toolsets;

creating maximum linkage to positive CJS

outcomes.

The Commercial Case supports the overall option

evaluation approach agreed with stakeholders,

including forensic leaders, and incorporates the

following alongside the standard OBC commercial

content:

current forensic landscape (As Is assessment);

options assessment;

priorities for commercial management action

9 Home Office Forensic Science Strategy, March

2016, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/506652/54493_Cm_9217_Forensic_Science_Strategy_Accessible.pdf

CURRENT FORENSIC LANDSCAPE

The current forensic landscape is summarised in

the situational assessment presented below in the

form of a SWOT analysis.

Further information on the forensic landscape

underpinning the Commercial Case is

incorporated within the main body of the case,

including:

A – Police forensic spend data trends

B – Traditional police forensics spend

C – Police spend on digital forensics

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/506652/54493_Cm_9217_Forensic_Science_Strategy_Accessible.pdf



OFFICIAL


High Level Situational Assessment (SWOT)

Figure 29: Forensic landscape ‘as-is’ SWOT analysis

T

WS

O

Strengths

Strong collaboration culture amongst forces

Established Marketplace management focus via

the Forensic Marketplace Strategy Group

(FMSG)

Established and highly credible traditional

supply base

Established independent regulator and a

focus on standards

Forensic Science Strategy aspiration

for a national solution and strategic

relationship with market

Weaknesses

Limited competition / new entrants in

Traditional Forensics

Lock in to long term contracts

Fragmented governance across

local / regional / national services

Funding pressure may

constrain Programme initiation

Availability of central skills /

capability to move at pace

Opportunit ies

Traditional versus digital segmentation

creates competition

Emerging and growing market in digital

forensics services

Technology increasingly enables CSI rapid

action

Digital Forensic pilots / demonstrators may be

scaled up

New MPS contract for Digital Forensics open to

all forces

Threats

Forces declaring UDI may undermine

national approach

Internal supply versus market

capability / capacity tension

Funding pressures may

constrain technology investment

Relative attractiveness of non

law enforcement markets

Inertia resists change,

particularly on internal supply market, which is

greater than external supply in monetary terms

OFFICIAL


The market structure for traditional forensic

services is largely set, and recorded external

spend has been generally falling in recent years.

Three suppliers dominate both legacy and new

business, with one supplier monopolising. Around

70% of new business is now tied in via recently

awarded long term contracts generally lasting until

2020 – 2024. Barriers to entry are considered

high in relation to quality standards, qualifications

and accreditation, and there appears little

attraction for new entrants, with the possible

exception of a few sub-contractors.

Convergence to any transformational option must

recognise the terms and parameters of existing

contracts, including some significant recent

awards in relation to opportunities to break out.

However, exiting recently-awarded long term

contracts may not be a realistic or viable

expectation in the short to medium term, nor is

there any evidence-based economic rationale, as

yet, to support this approach. Any transformation

plan must therefore not only ensure ongoing value

for money and performance in incumbent

contracts, but also find a way to engage

productively with the incumbent suppliers, working

in and around existing contractual arrangements

in the short to medium term.

These challenges are counterbalanced by a

significant opportunity from which to build a

platform for transformation, based on taking a

holistic “whole system” approach working across

the external supply of traditional forensics, digital

forensics and the internal market of in-house

provision. The fact that major suppliers are

already embracing and investing in new ways of

working under the latest collaboration contracts is

significant. Furthermore, the shift in demand

toward digital forensics represents an opportunity

to re-establish a strong and sustainable

competitive marketplace to support law

enforcement and criminal justice longer term.

For digital forensics, the approach to acquiring

and delivering a service is much less mature, and

offers a significant opportunity to cultivate a more

competitive marketplace strategy. FMSG led

research in 2015 10

indicated little appetite from

forces to become suppliers to other forces using

their respective in-house capabilities. This further

supports the need to work more closely with the

10

Forensic Marketplace Commercial Strategy & Tactical Planning Workshop 18

th February 2015

market to support scaling of national capacity and

capabilities. There is a wider population of both

global and UK-based suppliers in digital forensics,

but it should also be noted that law enforcement is

competing in a much wider industry pool than the

traditional forensics marketplace. Many of these

suppliers are orientated more towards products

than services, and may currently fall short on

accreditation requirements.

Despite the good work of the FMSG since its

inception, market sustainability remains an area of

concern. Several common themes and concerns

have been reinforced in discussions with

stakeholders on both client and supply sides of

the relationship and will require ongoing proactive

management; these are set out in more detail in

the Commercial Case. These issues relate to both

traditional and digital forensics (only recently

included in FMSG scope), and include elements

of value for money, consistency and cost of

accreditation, supplier lock-in, perceived lack of

market access and access to innovation; and the

overall economics of delivery in a 44 force model.

OPTIONS ASSESSMENT

The Commercial Case assesses the respective

options and provides supporting rationale as

summarised below.

Options Qualitative Comment

1 & 2

Fundamentally an incremental play on

“as-Is”, does not adequately address

national and transformational approach

and levers. Low incremental benefit

potential.

3

May offer a stronger central approach

and benefits from enhanced category

management but is fundamentally built

around a national procurement

framework approach that many forces

have already rejected. May still be

possible to accommodate alternative

contract models using national

specifications and standards. Requires

sustainment of a central capability, but

offers only limited influence over

national and transformational levers.

4

Potentially opens up greater

opportunity to influence pan-regional

and national levers. Opportunity to

evolve from current collaboration

structures. Potentially complicated

OFFICIAL


management and governance

structure given the volume of “lead

forces” operating under national

governance.

5

By far the most challenging to deliver

but creates a platform for a ‘whole

system’ approach and the ability to

drive all levers required to maximise

transformational benefits and market

engagement. This option is

significantly differentiated by creation

of a new management and service

delivery “entity” structure, and by

inclusion of front-line delivery in service

scope. Phased implementation may be

desirable in order to mitigate initial

concerns over transferring front-line

work outside of local force control. It is

currently unclear what impact, if any, a

front-line delivery shift has on the

market.

Figure 30: Commercial case options assessment

Given the perspective set by the Forensic Science

Strategy, and the extent of commitment to

recently awarded contracts, it is considered that

only Options 4 and 5 would ever converge toward

the level of national transformation benefits

envisaged.

Viability issues and questions remain around all

options but most critically around Options 4 and 5.

A commercial management action plan is

therefore integrated within the Commercial Case,

and referenced as a subset of the overall

Management Case presented to support the

execution of the preferred option.

The Commercial Case sets out in more general

terms the parameters that will ensure that specific

procurements yet to be identified, but derived to

support the preferred option at the next stage, are

both viable and executed in a manner consistent

with HM Treasury Green Book expectations.

SUMMARY

The Economic Case has considered the following

aspects in evaluating the options presented within

the OBC:

Quantitative assessment of the options

including:

Optimism bias analysis

Sensitivity analysis

Qualitative assessment of the options

including:

Questioning of forensic leaders as to which

option is best positioned to deliver the

benefits

Commercial assessment of the forensic

landscape and the impact of the options

Each of these assessments has concluded that

Option 5 is the preferred option. Option 5 shall

therefore be taken forward as the proposed option

within the Financial, Commercial and

Management cases.

OFFICIAL


INTRODUCTION

The Economic Case has identified Option 5 (Full

integration) as the preferred option for

consideration. The Financial Case outlines the

funding sources for the constituent cost elements

within Option 5.

The constituent cost elements are:

Forensic Delivery Costs – the cost of

personnel (including training), accreditation,

premises and services (i.e. logistics and

outsourced forensics services providers) for

the delivery of Business As Usual (BAU)

forensics services. IT costs are excluded

unless specifically identified.

Existing IT Delivery Costs - the costs of

maintaining the current level of IT capability.

Investment Costs – the business transition

costs required to deliver Option 5.

Additional Technical delivery costs – the

technical costs (i.e. new systems / services)

required to deliver Option 5.

Two cost profiles have been modelled for Option

5, as outlined below:

1. The “core cost” profile – Option 5

modelled against a baseline set of

assumptions and variables, as detailed in

the Economic Case. The optimism bias

identified in the Economic Case is also

included within this profile.

The core assumption baseline

46 force cohort involvement

2. The “sensitivity analysis” profile - Option

5 as modelled against the following

scenario from the sensitivity analysis, as

previously described in the Economic Case:

The core assumption baseline

28 force cohort involvement

The second profile above is important in the

context of the Financial Case, for two main

reasons:

It is unlikely that all forces will participate in TF

and the number of forces within an option is a

significant cost driver. Modelling Option 5 on a

28 force cohort will therefore give a cost profile

based on partial participation, which in itself is

a more probable scenario.

By extension, this has an impact on the Police

Transformation Funding request – as a

reduced force cohort will mean a smaller

overall delivery cost. It is assumed that the

Transformation Funding is accessible from FY

17/18 – 19/20.

For the avoidance of doubt, all costs detailed

within the Financial Case are presented:

In undiscounted terms

With a 2% compounded inflation over the

appraisal period

Without Value Added Tax (VAT) being applied

Financial Case

OFFICIAL


Non-core Cost 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 Totals



Sub-total Non-Core Costs 405.95 421.84 450.56 451.99 439.89 446.59 289.48 295.27 301.18 307.20 3809.98

Core Programme Cost

Option 5 - Investment Costs 6.71 14.79 18.35 13.54 14.27 14.15 9.66 5.52 5.37 0.00 102.37

Option 5 - Additional Tech Delivery Costs 0.00 63.86 49.58 38.25 28.85 49.53 35.68 36.39 37.12 37.86 377.12

Sub-total Core Costs 6.71 78.64 67.94 51.79 43.12 63.68 45.34 41.91 42.49 37.86 479.48

Total Non-Core & Core Costs 412.67 500.49 518.50 503.78 483.01 510.27 334.83 337.18 343.67 345.07 4289.47

Option 5 Optimism Bias

Optimism Bias 3.49 40.90 35.33 26.93 22.42 33.11 23.58 21.79 22.10 19.69 249.33

Sub-total Optimism Bias 3.49 40.90 35.33 26.93 22.42 33.11 23.58 21.79 22.10 19.69 249.33

Total Option 5 Costs 416.16 541.38 553.83 530.71 505.43 543.38 358.41 358.98 365.77 364.75 4538.80

Option 5 - Funding Sources (All £M)

Police Local Funding 405.95 421.84 450.56 451.99 439.89 446.59 289.48 295.27 301.18 307.20 3809.98

Sub-total Police Local Funding 405.95 421.84 450.56 451.99 439.89 446.59 289.48 295.27 301.18 307.20 3809.98

Police Transformation Funding

Police Transformation Funding 10.20 119.54 103.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sub-total Police Transformation Funding 10.20 119.54 103.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 233.01

Additional Funding Required

Additional Funding 0.00 0.00 0.00 78.72 65.54 96.79 68.92 63.70 64.59 57.55 495.81

Sub-total Additional Funding 0.00 0.00 0.00 78.72 65.54 96.79 68.92 63.70 64.59 57.55 495.81

Police Local Funding saving Vs. 'Do Nothing'

Do Nothing' Cost 409.37 425.50 454.00 461.02 470.24 479.64 489.24 499.02 509.00 519.18 4716.22

Option 5 Police Local Funding 405.95 421.84 450.56 451.99 439.89 446.59 289.48 295.27 301.18 307.20 3809.98

Variance 3.42 3.66 3.44 9.02 30.35 33.05 199.75 203.75 207.82 211.98 906.24

Net Additional Funding Required Vs Variance 3.42 3.66 3.44 -69.69 -35.20 -63.74 130.83 140.04 143.24 154.43 410.43

Figure 31: The “Core Cost” profile associated with Option 5

OFFICIAL


Non-core Cost 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 Totals

Forensic Delivery Costs 180.13 179.75 186.58 186.79 181.92 184.56 133.97 136.65 139.38 142.17 1651.90 a.

Existing IT Delivery Costs 11.36 11.19 11.33 11.56 11.01 11.14 7.82 7.98 8.14 8.30 99.83 b.

Sub-total Non-Core Costs 191.49 190.94 197.91 198.35 192.93 195.70 141.79 144.63 147.52 150.47 1751.73 c.

Core Programme Cost

Option 5 - Investment Costs 3.61 7.95 9.86 7.27 7.66 7.60 5.19 2.96 2.89 0.00 54.99 d.

Option 5 - Additional Tech Delivery Costs 0.00 35.74 28.96 22.29 17.54 28.40 18.36 18.73 19.11 19.49 208.61 e.

Sub-total Core Costs 3.61 43.68 38.82 29.56 25.20 36.01 23.56 21.70 21.99 19.49 263.60 f.

Total Non-Core & Core Costs 195.09 234.62 236.73 227.91 218.13 231.70 165.35 166.33 169.51 169.96 2015.34 g.

Option 5 - Funding Sources (All £M)

Police Local Funding 191.49 190.94 197.91 198.35 192.93 195.70 141.79 144.63 147.52 150.47 1751.73 c. above

Sub-total Police Local Funding 191.49 190.94 197.91 198.35 192.93 195.70 141.79 144.63 147.52 150.47 1751.73 h.

Police Transformation Funding

Police Transformation Funding 3.61 43.68 38.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 86.10

f. above for a7/18 – 19/20

Sub-total Police Transformation Funding 3.61 43.68 38.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 86.10

Additional Funding Required

Additional Funding 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.56 25.20 36.01 23.56 21.70 21.99 19.49 177.50

f. above for 20/21

onwards

Sub-total Additional Funding 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.56 25.20 36.01 23.56 21.70 21.99 19.49 177.50 i.

Police Local Funding saving Vs. 'Do Nothing'

Do Nothing' Cost 193.81 224.67 219.19 212.35 206.83 216.27 203.71 203.71 203.71 203.71 2087.95 h. above

Option 5 Police Local Funding 191.49 190.94 197.91 198.35 192.93 195.70 141.79 144.63 147.52 150.47 1751.73 j.

Variance 2.32 33.73 21.29 14.00 13.89 20.57 61.91 59.08 56.18 53.23 336.21 j. above less

i.

Net Additional Funding Required Vs Variance 2.32 33.73 21.29 -15.56 -11.30 -15.44 38.36 37.38 34.19 33.75 158.71

Figure 32: The “Sensitivity Analysis” profile associated with Option 5

OFFICIAL


A summary of the profiles are shown below:

OPTION 5 – CORE COST PROFILE

Option 5 - Core Cost Profile Notes

Costs £M

Sub-total Non-Core Costs 3809.98

Sub-total Core Costs 479.48

Sub-total Optimism Bias 249.33

Total Option 5 Costs 4538.80 Total cost to deliver Option 5

Funding Required £M

Police Local Funding 3809.98

Police Transformation Funding 233.01

Remaining Funding Required -495.81 Additional funding required beyond

the Police Transformation Funding

Variance - Do Nothing Vs Police Local Funding 906.24 Saving to Police by proceeding with

Option 5, vs the 'do nothing' baseline

Remaining Funding Available to Police

Local Fund

410.43 Balance of saving now available for

Police reinvestment

Figure 33: The “Core Cost” profile summary

OFFICIAL


OPTION 5 – SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS COST PROFILE

Option 5 - Sensitivity Analysis Cost Profile Notes

Costs £M

Sub-total Non-Core Costs 1751.73

Sub-total Core Costs 263.60

Sub-total Optimism Bias 0.00

Total Option 5 Costs 2015.33 Total cost to deliver Option 5

Funding Required £M


Police Transformation Funding 86.1 Programme costs that fall within the Transformation Funding window

Remaining Funding Required -177.50 Additional funding required beyond the Police Transformation Funding window

Variance - 'Do Nothing' Vs


Saving to Police from proceeding with Option 5, vs the 'do nothing' baseline (Do Nothing - Op 5 Police Local Funding)

Remaining Funding Available

to Police Local Fund 158.71 Balance of saving now available for Police reinvestment

Figure 34: The “Sensitivity Analysis Cost” profile summary

SUMMARY

There are two significant aspects to highlight from

the cost profiles, which are themselves important

items to explore between the Outline Business

Case and Full Business Case phases of

Transforming Forensics:

There is an implicit assumption within this

Financial Case that any additional costs

required to support Option 5 beyond the Police

Reform and Transformation Funding window

can be offset against the savings that Option 5

will deliver to Police Local budgets. Obtaining

force cohort buy-in to this assumption (see the

bullet below) is key to the future funding of

Option 5.

The financial analysis has shown that the

number of forces within the Option 5 cohort is

a large varying factor to the overall cost of the

option. It is therefore key that, post Outline

Business Case, the size and mix of the force

cohort be quickly established, such that the

financial profile (and therefore Police Reform

and Transformation funding usage, as well as

reliance on Police Local Funding) can be

determined. Identifying and confirming the

force cohort is therefore captured as one of the

initial tasks in the transition plan associated

with Option 5.

OFFICIAL


INTRODUCTION

The HM Treasury Green Book11

sets the following

expectation of the Commercial Case at OBC

stage:

Demonstrates that the “preferred option”

results in viable procurement and a well-

structured deal.

Planning and management of the procurement

occurs.

A spending authority will set how the “preferred

option” for spend will be procured,

competitively, in accordance with the current

regulations for public sector procurements.

The spending authority to clearly specify

service requirements for the spending proposal

in output terms, together with the anticipated

charging regime and the allocation of risk in

each of the design, build, funding and

operational (DBFO) phases of the proposed

scheme.

Includes the contractual arrangements and

specifies the accountancy treatment to be

used for the proposed service.

The Commercial Case assumes the preferred

option will be fulfilled via the provision of forensic

transformation services under multiple contracts,

rather than by execution of a single project-based

transformational procurement project.

For the purposes of the Commercial Case, the

following definitions are adopted.

11

HM Treasury Green Book https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-green-book-appraisal-and-evaluation-in-central-governent

a. “Traditional Forensics” (aligned to

Forensic Science Strategy)

“The application of science to a criminal

investigation and court proceedings. This

includes crime scene investigation and

the collection, identification, analysis and

interpretation of potential evidence such

as DNA, fingerprints, drug analysis and

footwear marks.”

b. “Digital Forensics” (aligned to Digital

Forensics Portfolio as recommended by

Programme Director)

“The application of science to the

identification, collection, examination and

analysis of electronic data whilst

preserving the integrity of the information

and maintaining the chain of custody of

that data”

The Commercial Case supports the overall option

evaluation approach agreed with stakeholders,

including forensic leaders, and incorporates the

following alongside the standard Outline Business

Case commercial content, intended to support the

realisation of the preferred option (Full Forensic

Integration) through to the Full Business Case

stage:

Current Forensic Landscape (“As-Is”)

Assessment

Options Assessment

Priorities for commercial management action

Commercial Case

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-green-book-appraisal-and-evaluation-in-central-governent



OFFICIAL


STRATEGIC CONTEXT

The strategic context is grounded in the Forensic

Science Strategy12

, published and presented to

Parliament in March 2016. It is assumed that the

Forensic Science Strategy is fully supported and

aligned within the wider landscape of policing

transformation, including the Modern Crime

Prevention Strategy13

, and Digital Investigation

and Intelligence14

.

The Forensic Science Strategy sets out a

commitment, by the end of this Parliament, to

design and deliver a national approach to forensic

science delivery, supported by the Home Office.

The pillars of this national approach draw out

several aspirations which have a direct and

significant impact on the market for forensic

services, and the commercial arrangements which

will underpin future procurement. The most critical

aspirations driving the Commercial Case are

expressed in the strategy as:

a. consistent quality management and

standardisation across police forces,

including a clearer statutory role for the

Forensic Science Regulator;

b. a review by police forces of the case for

moving current fragmented provision

into a Joint Forensic and Biometric

Service to achieve economies of scale,

increased capability and resilience;

c. ongoing oversight of the health of the

supply chain, including contingency

plans developed by police forces to cope

with disruption to the market;

12

Home Office Forensic Science Strategy, March 2016, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/506652/54493_Cm_9217_Forensic_Science_Strategy_Accessible.pdf 13

Modern Crime Prevention Strategy, March 2016, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/509831/6.1770_Modern_Crime_Prevention_Strategy_final_WEB_version.pdf 14

Digital Investigation and Intelligence, Policing Capabilities for a Digital Age, http://www.npcc.police.uk/documents/reports/Digital%20Investigation%20and%20Intelligence%20Policing%20capabilities%20for%20a%20digital%20age%20April%202015.pdf

d. nurturing a stronger partnership with

industry and education to ensure that

learning programmes are future proofed

and aligned to the business requirements.

The National Police Lead for Digital Investigation

and Intelligence (DII), has also set out a

framework for DII development nationally,

regionally and locally, focusing on people, ways of

working, digital sources, exploitation and

partnerships. DII sets the aspiration of a national

approach to digital forensics to ensure that

services are designed, built once, and used

many times across law enforcement agencies.

This means that police forces need to ensure that

as any particular tools or techniques are

developed, there is sufficient governance and

infrastructure in place to avoid unnecessary

duplication. Digital forensic capabilities are to be

shared between law enforcement agencies as

quickly as possible where operational and legal

considerations permit.

Further commercial strategy context is considered

under the section of the Commercial Case

headed “Commercial Principles”, broadly aligned

to the NPCC and Home Office sponsored

Collaborative Law Enforcement Procurement

Programme15

.

CURRENT LANDSCAPE

The review of the commercial landscape for

forensic services has been derived from several

sources, primarily consisting of the following:

Transforming Forensics project data collection

including the force cohort questionnaire.

The Home Office Forensic Science Strategy

and subsequent reviews.

NAO report entitled “The Home Office’s

Oversight of Forensic Services” December

201416

.

15

Collaborative Law Enforcement Procurement Programme, October 2016 http://instituteforcollaborativeworking.com/Resources/Documents/exec_network_2016/lee_tribe_home_office.pdf 16

NAO Report entitled “The Home Office’s Oversight of Forensic Services” December 2014,




https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/509831/6.1770_Modern_Crime_Prevention_Strategy_final_WEB_version.pdf




http://www.npcc.police.uk/documents/reports/Digital%20Investigation%20and%20Intelligence%20Policing%20capabilities%20for%20a%20digital%20age%20April%202015.pdf




http://instituteforcollaborativeworking.com/Resources/Documents/exec_network_2016/lee_tribe_home_office.pdf



OFFICIAL


Forensic Science Regulator Annual Report

dated January 201717

.

The Collaborative Law Enforcement

Procurement (CLEP) Programme Digital

Forensics Initial Briefing Paper (v3.1, issued

January 2017).

Home Office Forensic Marketplace Team

Management Information for 2015/16.

Stakeholder meetings and conference calls.

Limited industry engagement.

Other desk and web-based research into the

forensic marketplace.

https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/The-Home-Office%E2%80%99s-oversight-of-forensic-services.pdf 17

Forensic Science Regulator Annual Report dated January 2017, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/forensic-science-regulator-annual-report-2016

No new primary market research has been

commissioned to support the Commercial Case.

No commercial market research or analyst reports

have been acquired. Freely available web based

market commentaries are referred to where

relevant.

In broad terms the approach taken has sought to

achieve a robust understanding of the Landscape

summarised in Figure 35 below.

Current

forensic

suppliers

Data

collection

force cohort

Market

strategy

board

Existing

police

collaborations

Commercial Case

Understand the current ‘as-

is’ regarding:

Force procurement models

and values

Key suppliers to forces

Different licensing and

procurement methods used

by forces

Trends between forces and

collaborations

Understand:

Existing engagements with

forensic supply chain

How forces currently

collaborate in enacting

procurements

Lessons learned that can

inform the OBC strategy

Understand:

Views and positions from

the market

Validation of the current

model; and contracting and

spend landscape from data

collection activity

Enable:

A more strategic relationship

with forensics supply chain

Align with:

Terms of reference

Strategic aims

Current operating model

Potential future models

Figure 35: Commercial Case principles

A copy of the supporting “as-is” assessment product is included within Appendix D.

https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/The-Home-Office%E2%80%99s-oversight-of-forensic-services.pdf




https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/forensic-science-regulator-annual-report-2016

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/forensic-science-regulator-annual-report-2016

OFFICIAL


BUSINESS AND SERVICE REQUIREMENTS

BUSINESS REQUIREMENTS

The Strategic Case sets out the rationale for

transforming forensic service delivery. As part of

this analysis, it identifies the essential goals for a

future service as:

Delivering better outcomes

Building capability for the future

Supporting re-investment in priority areas


The Strategic Case goes on to describe how a set

of five options for future service design has been

developed for consideration.

The Transforming Forensics (formerly Joint

Forensic and Biometric Service) Project

Mandate18

establishes six high-level “Must Have”

business requirements mapped to ten streams of

cashable or potentially cashable benefits. The

extent to which the OBC options satisfy these

high-level requirements and benefit expectations

has been assessed in the Economic Case. This

has concluded that Option 5 (Full Forensic

Integration) is the most advantageous option for

future forensic service delivery. This Commercial

Case therefore, focuses on the commercial

realisation of Option 5 (Full Forensic Integration).

SERVICE REQUIREMENTS

High-level service mapping has been undertaken

by the project against the scope of Options 1 to 5

described more fully in the Economic Case.

These options are aligned to 15 underlying

service elements, each of which gives rise to a

specific subset of service requirements. Each

option is progressively richer in content in terms of

back office non-casework-related activity, back-

end casework consolidation, and frontline forensic

operations at the crime scene.

Further development of the FBC will involve a

challenge process to identify the most efficient

and effective delivery mechanisms available to

support each capability, particularly where

services may potentially be moving outside their

historical market provision model.

18

Joint Forensics & Biometrics Service, Programme Mandate, v0.1, May 2016

It is envisaged that the final set of service

requirements will consist of a defined set of

products and services which will be packaged and

delivered consistently by the internal and external

market, through an agreed operating model.

These service requirements will need to

accommodate the range of operational

collaboration models currently adopted by police

forces and any other public service organisations

in scope. The service requirements will broadly

fall into the following sub-categories for futue

commercial and procurement strategy purposes:

Traditional forensic services

Traditional forensic supplies

Digital forensic services

Digital forensic supplies

Supporting technology, tools and systems

integration

Managed services supporting all or some of

the above

Supply Chain Management

National and regional enabling infrastructure,

e.g. network and cloud based systems

Training services

Forensic archiving

People,skills and recruitment

Proficiency testing services

R&D

Other national regional requirments not falling

into any of the above sub-categories

The service requirement descriptions to be used

to support procurement plans intended to deliver

the preferred option will be identified as part of the

work required to prepare the Full Business Case.

A set of national specifications is generally

available to support traditional forensic service

delivery based on what was previously developed

to support the National Forensic Framework (Next

Generation), and based on standards and

guidance agreed with the Forensic Science

Regulator. These service descriptions and SLAs

are well established and already widely used

across the forensic delivery community. They will

progressively be adapted to support new

contracts and future convergence to the preferred

option.

OFFICIAL


POTENTIAL FOR RISK TRANSFER

This section provides a high-level view of how the

opportunity for risk transfer might be approached

between the Authority, forces and the supply

chain under the preferred option. Option 5

features a national delivery entity and supporting

capability, the scope of which will be further

developed at the OBC to FBC stage.

An early view of the potential scope for risk

transfer highlights four main risk areas that would

require particular focus in the execution of the

preferred option, the detail of which will require

further work during the OBC to FBC stage,

include:

A potential shift of delivery and operational risk

away from forces as operations and resources

are progressively migrated to the new model.

The potential for acceptance of delivery and

operational risk within the scope of the new

integrated service entity, yet to be fully scoped.

A potential shift toward greater sharing of risk

with industry, an extension of some of the

“partnership”-focused relationships already

being created under new contracting and

collaboration models.

The potential delegation of supply chain and

market management risk depending upon the

structure and limitations of any new supply

arrangements created to support the preferred

option.

There is currently no specific information available

to assess the potential impact of Brexit on the

forensic marketplace in such areas as research

funding, standards development, and any ripple

through effect on the continued availability of, and

access to, a skilled forensic workforce.

COMMERCIAL PRINCIPLES

In broad terms the Transforming Forensics project

will seek to follow established policy, principles

and guidelines to achieve competitive, value for

money commercial and service outcomes. At high

level these principles will include satisfying the

following:

EU Public Procurement Regulations and Policy

Directives where relevant;

National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC)

Commercial & Procurement Policy;

Collaborative Law Enforcement Procurement

(CLEP) Programme;

NPCC Information Management and

Operational Requirements Committee;

Home Office Commercial Policy &

Architectural Principles (to the extent they

apply to NPCC Police led programmes);

Standards and Guidelines set by the Forensic

Science Regulator;

Wider Government Commercial Policy

including Government Supplier Standard19

.

Any deviance from these broad principles will

need to be subject to business justification

underpinned by the relevant evidence base and

governance.

Options 3, 4 and 5 considered in the OBC are

characterised by progressively greater levels of

coordination in requirements definition,

marketplace management, centrally-facilitated

procurement enabling local delivery, and

casework management. These models in turn

drive increasing depth in the supplier relationship

model required for success. This is addressed

further under governance and procurement

mechanisms below.

PROPOSED CHARGING MECHANISMS

A range of charging models will be applied based on the nature of individual product and service contracts. Given the scope of component services involved in delivering the preferred option, it is likely that the full range of models will be applied to different transactions. For complex transactions, a range of models may be applied within a single contract. The most commonly used charging mechanisms to be deployed will include: catalogue-based unit pricing for standard

products and services (fixed and variable),

including national purchasing of new

technology, e.g. Rapid DNA;

project-based transition and transformation

charges;

managed service charges and fees;

capacity-based annual or quarterly fees,

subject to agreed volume tolerance;

forensics “as a service” style pricing;

19

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/supplier-standard-for-digital-and-technology-service-providers




OFFICIAL


licence fees charged to individuals or groups of

users

professional service charges (time and

materials based).

The preferred option is likely to drive a combination of both commercial charging for external supply of services as described above, and the need to create a new internal charging model to accommodate national governance and service delivery elements, to be charged from the centre to regions and forces as recipients of service. The detail of this will need to be established as part of the FBC planning to enable timely alignment with the budget planning cycle.

PROPOSED CONTRACT LENGTHS

A full range of potential contract lengths will be

considered appropriate to the nature of the

specific transactions required to deliver any given

component of the preferred solution.

General Public Procurement policy in recent years

has driven toward shorter contract durations for

smaller packages of work. This is intended to

encourage regular competition, encourage

adoption of industry standard cloud-based

solutions, acquisition via multi-tenanted

framework contracts and marketplace, and to

reduce the incidence of bespoke project-based

investments, which create long term supplier lock

in. Such arrangements will typically apply to the

more commoditised service requirements. In

these instances, a project contract term or call off

award of 1–3 years may be appropriate.

Framework contracts will typically have a term of

3 to 4 years, but may be longer if clearly stated at

OJEU Notice stage and commercially justified.

In more complex cases longer contract durations

may appropriate. These contracts will typically

involve complex collaboration, a degree of project

specific authority or supplier-based investment

required to deliver the service, and a period of

transition and or transformation. The recently

awarded Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

contracts for forensic services20

are examples of

such a contract awarded on the basis of a term of

20

MPS OJEU Notices, 2015

http://www.government-online.net/provide-forensics-service-to-metropolitan-police/ http://www.government-online.net/provide-digital-forensics-managed-service-to-metropolitan-police/

seven years with further options to extend up to

ten years. In the case of the MPS, the case for

such a long contract has been justified on the

grounds of building a deeper relationship which

delivers mutual benefit and seeds confidence to

invest in research and innovation. The recently

awarded (East Midlands Special Operations Unit

(EMSOU)21

collaboration contract establishes a

similar term. Where longer contract durations are

contemplated, key contract terms need to reflect

the balance of risk. Key areas to be considered

are reflected below.

In the case of the preferred Option 5, the current

view of likely contract length, by service

component is as set out in Figure 36 below.

Service

Requirement

Likely

contract

duration

Rationale

Technology 1-3 Market driven change

and churn

Managed

Services

3-5 Create deeper

relationship, support

transition

Full

outsourcing

5-7 Allow a full

investment cycle,

facilitate

transformation and

innovation

National

delivery entity

(Force

collaboration

“Contract”)

5-7 Allow a full

investment cycle,

facilitate

transformation and

innovation

Figure 36: Service components and rationale

PROPOSED KEY CONTRACT CLAUSES

No single contracting model will apply to all

elements of the preferred option solution.

In general, Transforming Forensics will seek to

apply established police precedent terms and

conditions based on existing collaborative

contracts or police model contracts. Where value

for money and service specifications are assured,

the solution will seek to re-use existing

collaborative contracts and frameworks, including

21

EMSOU -FS Tender for the Supply of Regional

External Forensic Service Provision 2016

http://www.government-online.net/provide-forensics-service-to-metropolitan-police/

http://www.government-online.net/provide-forensics-service-to-metropolitan-police/

http://www.government-online.net/provide-digital-forensics-managed-service-to-metropolitan-police/

http://www.government-online.net/provide-digital-forensics-managed-service-to-metropolitan-police/

OFFICIAL


those made available via the Home Office or

Crown Commercial Service (E.g. Digital

Marketplace). This approach reflects the key

pillars of the NPCC Collaborative Law

Enforcement Procurement Programme, i.e.

standardisation, aggregation, and collaboration.

For more bespoke contracts the default position is

the Government Model Service Contract (MSC)22

.

The MSC forms a set of model terms and

conditions for major service contracts that are

published for use by government departments

and other public sector organisations. The MSC

reflects current government priorities and

recommended ways of doing business. The

model aims to aid assurance, reduce

administration, legal costs and negotiation time.

The MSC is suitable for use with a wide range of

business services that public sector organisations

purchase and contains applicable provisions for

contracts for business process outsourcing and or

IT delivery services. The MSC is generally

recognised by industry, and can generally be

modified to ensure its provisions are appropriate

and proportionate to the business opportunity.

Contracts intended to support complex

transformational requirements, potentially for a

longer time period, require specific key clauses to

reflect the risk profile of the transaction and the

allocation of responsibilities. In the context of the

preferred option, the following key contract

clauses and risk areas will require careful

consideration in context of both current and future

procurement arrangements:

novation and transfer arrangements if a new

contracting entity introduced;

supply chain and market management

transparency;

financial and charging model, price reviews

and VfM transparency;

assurance and Accreditation standards

(including those set by the Forensic Science

Regulator);

outcome-based service specifications;

liabilities and indemnities;

TUPE obligations;

22

Government Model Service Contract (MSC)

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/model-

services-contract

service development and innovation

provisions;

delivery milestones (transition and

transformation plan) and incentives;

Service Level Agreements and remedies for

failure;

performance management and Step In rights;

termination and exit provisions;

transition and exit assistance provisions;

reporting and governance.

In addition to the terms governing commercial

supply, the implementation of the preferred option

will require establishment of terms governing

internal supply, collaboration, service between the

national delivery model and users of the services

in forces and regions. The same commercial

principles as outlined above should generally be

applied as a guide.

GOVERNANCE AND PROCUREMENT MECHANISMS

The viability of the preferred option requires

application of advanced techniques in

Collaborative Relationship Management and

Category Management, underpinned by the

required governance. The assessment of options

included taking a view against a Category

Management maturity model as set out below.

Option 5 represents the position of maximum

opportunity in terms of classic category

management levers of aggregation,

standardisation, demand management, and ability

to influence the entire external and internal

service landscape.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/model-services-contract

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/model-services-contract

OFFICIAL


ASSESSMENT VIEW AGAINST CATEGORY MANAGEMENT MATURITY MODEL

Option 1

(Do Nothing)

Option 2

(Exploit HOB +)

Option 3

(Nationally Enabled Infrastructure)

Option 4

(Aggregate and Consolidate)

Option 5

(Full Integration)

No change from current commercial

landscape – no (or very limited)

additional benefits to be realised.

Encompasses none of the features of

Category Management.

Minimal benefit from Fingerprint

Bureaux kit.

Low annual aggregated spend,

therefore minimal savings anticipated.

Entails aggregation of only one sub-

category therefore on the very low

scale of Category Management.

Some products and services to be

specified and managed centrally

enabling aggregation of demand and

more consistent contract

management.

Limited influence on internal market.

Simplified /unified contract

management.

Represents an old contract model (i.e.

Frameworks established at the

“Centre”, called off by forces).

Assumes the Procurement is

managed by the TF Programme,

therefore a time-limited initiative.

Recent major contracts (Met,

EMSOU, SWCC) would need to be

managed to accommodate new

commercial arrangements

A more mature level of category

management with harmonisation of

specifications and aggregation of

demand for some sub-categories.

Assumes a much greater level of

aggregation of demand, leading to

better value for money.

Strong Category Management

governance.

Collaborative R&D.

Assurance and benchmarking.

Allows for commonality of

specifications and requirements.

Suppliers still have to deal with

multiple tenders and contracts.

Fragmented and potentially

inconsistent Contract Management.

Potential for inconsistent supplier

performance and contract

management.

Recent major contracts (MPS,



commercial arrangements.

Moving towards full Category

Management but no (or very limited)

ability to manage the entire market.

Full service delivery entity creates the

strongest national governance.

Only Option which allows proper

market management and

development.

Strong demand management.

Allows for commonality of

specifications and requirements but

with more viability of their application

than under Option 4.

Offers most positive opportunity for

best supply chain and price value

through “one to many” customer to

market model.

Integrated systems and MI.

Enables full aggregation of demand

and hence best leverage, and

economies of scale.

Modelling of products and service

pricing to determine the “should cost”.

Best utilisation of Procurement and

Commercial resources.

Allows for holistic contract

management.

Recent major contracts (MPS,



commercial arrangements.

Full category management, expected

to deliver all the associated benefits.

Figure 37: Option assessment against category management model

Options 3, 4 or 5 requires progressively more sophisticated and stronger category and collaborative governance as outlined below.

OFFICIAL


CATEGORY MANAGEMENT

The overall market management function, and the

balance of responsibilities between the Home

Office, individual forces, the police ICT company,

the well-established collaborative and regional

structures may need re-establishing under the

NPCC, working with the Forensic Marketplace

Strategy Group and CLEP in a manner which

resets the relationship with the internal and

external market in context with the preferred

operating model. There is currently a risk that the

responsibility for overall delivery of VfM,

performance, accreditation and market

sustainment could become too fragmented across

the breadth of the Transforming Forensics

delivery landscape.

In parallel with the planned shift of ownership of

the Transforming Forensics delivery into police

governance from 1 April 2017, there is an

opportunity to refresh the management and

running of the Forensic Marketplace Strategy

Group (FSMG) to create a clean line of

operational category management accountability

via the NPCC, National Commercial Board,

National Police Procurement Executive, the CLEP

and individual forces. This police governance

model would also need to recognise and

incorporate any new structures created under or

inspired by Transforming Forensics. A

reinforcement and consolidation of the role of the

Forensic Marketplace Strategy Group will refocus

specific oversight to the commercial operations

and management required to underpin execution

of the preferred option. Operational procurement

resources will then be focused on the forensic

category management strategy and its execution,

sourced via existing police procurement

collaboration resources where available, the

police ICT company, or via resources seconded in

from either the Home Office or the external

market where necessary, to deliver the

Transforming Forensics project outcomes. Given

the specialised nature of the marketplace, it is

preferable for existing forensic market

procurement specialists to lead the activity with

appropriate strategic management oversight.

COLLABORATIVE RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT

Execution of the preferred option is likely to be a

long term and complex undertaking which, if

approved, will span the entire lifecycle of all

existing and planned contracts in the current

landscape, and needs to plan for the succession

of these contracts as part of the transformation

process. Success will require high order

collaborative working and relationship

management across both the customer and the

supply chain community. A best practice model

should therefore be adopted. Under the

leadership of the FSMG, a formalised approach,

aligned to the principles of BS11000

(Collaborative Business Relationships)23

or

equivalent as advised by the National Commercial

Board, should be considered as a critical enabling

investment. This will maximise the opportunity to

bring the “centrally enabled, locally delivered”

philosophy to life within a comprehensive

relationship management plan tailored to support

all levels of collaboration across national and local

Policing, and all aspects of the forensics supply

chain, both Traditional and Digital.

Implementing a formalised and structured

approach sends out a strong message to the

marketplace other business and political

stakeholders that Transforming Forensics is

different, and that accreditation at all levels of the

supply chain is a central pillar to the sector-wide

collaboration. One approach may involve creation

of a senior supplier-facing Steering Board for

Transforming Forensics, operating alongside the

internal police and Home Office governance

framework, and outside any specific contract

governance.

Best practice category management delivers

incremental bottom line benefits. CLEP estimates

this at 14% based on its general track record of

standardisation, aggregation and collaboration.

Wider market surveys support this view. Future

Purchasing’s Global Category Management

Leadership Report for 2016/17, “Collaborating For

Category Management Success, Bridging The

23

BS11000 https://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/bs-11000-collaborative-business-relationships/

https://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/bs-11000-collaborative-business-relationships/


OFFICIAL


Performance and Value Gap”24

estimates that

procurement leaders typically achieve between

11.1% and 16.3%. It is expected that application

of full Category Management across the scope of

forensic activity captured within the scope of

Option 5 (Full Integration) would establish a

benefits delivery challenge in this range as a

significant contribution to the overall benefits case

set out elsewhere in the OBC.

KEY STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

A key stakeholder mapping exercise has been

undertaken and initial engagements are in hand to

support the OBC. This work establishes the

platform from which stakeholder management

focus will be driven through from the OBC to the

FBC phase.

PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS (INCLUDING TUPE)

This area has not been assessed at present,

primarily as in order to review TUPE

considerations confirmation of a Transforming

Forensics programme force cohort would be

required (so that the forces and therefore

personnel could be determined). This area

therefore needs a more thorough review of

preferred option content by force FTE, mapped to

the end state and anticipated market provision

model, as part of the FBC effort. Option 5

distinguishes itself most notably in this regard with

respect to the creation of a new central service

delivery entity, and the potential shift of frontline

activity from law enforcement organisations.

None of the recently awarded collaboration

contracts reviewed in the “As-Is” assessment

resulted in any material TUPE transfer of people,

assets and facilities. Further discussion with the

Forensic Marketplace Management team will

confirm any wider lessons learnt.

In the absence of any other NPCC and HO

corporate template, the ACAS and Government

UK guides25

contain appropriate guidance and

templates. HR impact needs to be mapped

24

http://www.futurepurchasing.com/catman-leadership-executive-summary-report-2017 25

http://www.acas.org.uk/media/pdf/j/p/Handling-

TUPE-Transfers-The-Acas-Guide.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tupe-

a-guide-to-the-2006-regulations

against the relevant business design options to

determine the extent to which services and people

fall within the scope of TUPE. These impacts will

be reflected in the FBC.

OPTION ASSESSMENT

An option assessment has been undertaken and

documented within the Economic Case. The FBC

phase of the work will develop and set out

implications on the existing (and potentially new)

supply chain(s) associated with Option 5,

including in-house vs bought-in potential and

wider feasibility considerations.

PROCUREMENT STRATEGY AND IMPLEMENTATION TIMESCALES

At this stage there are no specific procurement

strategies or plans such as RFIs, market

engagements, or OJEU notices to be approved as

part of this OBC submission, these plans have yet

to be formulated and will therefore form part of the

FBC work.

FRS 5 ACCOUNTANCY TREATMENT

It is envisaged that the assets engaged in the

future delivery of the forensic services will

comprise a mix of both on and off the balance

sheet entities depending on the nature of

individual service propositions, and legacy

provision. In the case of the preferred option the

anticipated asset treatment or change by service

component will be assessed in the FBC phase

through collaboration between the Commercial

case and Finance case.

CONCLUSION AND MANAGEMENT ACTIONS

Option 5 (Full Forensic Integration) is

commercially viable but requires further

development during the FBC phase. In order to

increase the probability of success, and the

realisation of benefits associated with Option 5, a

set of priorities for commercial management

action are identified below and form part of the

overall Management Case supporting the ongoing

execution of the recommendations set out in the

OBC.

http://www.futurepurchasing.com/catman-leadership-executive-summary-report-2017

http://www.futurepurchasing.com/catman-leadership-executive-summary-report-2017

http://www.acas.org.uk/media/pdf/j/p/Handling-TUPE-Transfers-The-Acas-Guide.pdf

http://www.acas.org.uk/media/pdf/j/p/Handling-TUPE-Transfers-The-Acas-Guide.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tupe-a-guide-to-the-2006-regulations

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tupe-a-guide-to-the-2006-regulations

OFFICIAL


PRIORITIES FOR COMMERCIAL MANAGEMENT ACTION

1. Establish the commercial component of the

Transformation Programme: There is an

immediate need to establish the commercial

management elements of the central

programme, and thereby establish policy

direction over the extent to which the execution

and terms of existing contracts, and contracts

yet to be awarded, may already be

constraining the national transformation

opportunity. There may be an immediate need

to introduce measures to more effectively

manage demand, limit financial and

contractual commitments, and scrutinise

procurement renewals in the short (1-3 years)

term. National direction may then be

supportive toward cross-contract assurance

activity across VFM, standards and

performance expectations given the long

period of contract term entered in some key

cases.

2. Operationalise the Forensic

Marketplace Strategy Group (FMSG): A

reinforcement and consolidation of the

role of the FMSG, within the new

Transforming Forensics operating

structure defined by Option 5, is required

to maximise direct accountability and

management oversight of the commercial

operations. FMSG will underpin the

capacity and commitment to further invest

in the strength of category management

and collaborative relationship

management, including exercising control

and influence over the internal market,

drawing down its authority from the

approved Transforming Forensics

mandate to be established via the NPCC.

3. Formalise Category Management

model: Success will require investment in

leadership skills, category management,

collaborative working and relationship

management across both customer and

the supply chain community. It is

assumed that the police commercial

community already has access to a

standard category management model

which would be suitably applied and fine

tuned to the forensics opportunity,

building on existing work. The FMSG has

already begun the process of identifying

commodity targets for 2016/17

implementation, e.g. “deep dive” on

mobile kiosks, and is best placed to work

with the police ICT company on common

hardware, software and licencing

requirements.

4. Implement best practice Collaborative

Relationship Management model: A

best practice collaborative relationship

model should be adopted, under the

leadership of the FMSG, possibly aligned

to the principles of BS11000

(Collaborative Business Relationships) 26

or equivalent as advised by the National

Commercial Board. This should be

considered as a critical enabling

investment for Option 5. Implementing a

formalised and structured approach sends

out a strong message to the marketplace

and to other business and political

stakeholders that Transforming Forensics

is different, and that accreditation at all

levels of the supply chain is a central pillar

to the sector-wide collaboration.

5. Activate a contract management and

succession plan: Execution of the

preferred option is likely to be a long term

and complex undertaking which will span

the entire lifecycle of all existing and

planned contracts in the current

landscape. This is likely to take the form

of a gradual convergence rather than a

more disruptive approach. Ability to

operate within and migrate from the

parameters set by existing contracts will

be critical, with eventual succession

planning for these contracts integrated

into the transformation process.

6. Complete market scoping of Option 5:

A deeper understanding is required to

fully understand the market capability

available to deliver all service

components in the scope of Option 5,

particularly where services may be

shifting to market provision for the first

time. Further development of the FBC will

involve a challenge process to identify the

most efficient and effective delivery

mechanisms available to support each

service component.

7. Commission FMSG evaluation of

contract operating models: This will be

a critical work stream in Transforming

Forensics. Availability of empirical

26

BS11000 https://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/bs-11000-collaborative-business-relationships/



OFFICIAL


evidence to support the option and

evaluation of current contract model

variants is currently limited. The FMSG

work already initiated needs to be further

scoped and implemented following an

initial period (6 – 12 months) of operation

of the new models.

8. Determine TUPE scope: No headcount

or asset transfer based view of Option 5

has been reviewed, so the potential TUPE

impacts of each have yet to be included in

the case.

9. Engage industry: The two main Forensic

Trade Associations, AFSP and FAPSA,

have a vital role to play, operating as

“virtual suppliers” within a collaborative

model. Through a fully inclusive

approach, the transformational agenda

can continue to be developed at national

level, rather than being strictly limited by

the constraints of individual incumbent

supplier contracts. By harnessing the

AFSP and FAPSA (and possibly others

driven by service requirements) in this

way, the national organisation can drive

its agenda across the entire market. This

would include major suppliers and SMEs,

traditional and digital forensic services,

and support early identification and

planning potential for new services and

outsourcing, including the frontline

support potentially required under Option

5.

10. Develop new routes to market: The

Government Digital Marketplace27

may

provide a force-neutral route to support

wider market creation in digital forensic

services. Proactive use of this channel,

driven via a relaunched (repurposed to

Transforming Forensics) FMSG, may

provide ready access to additional

services, specified to agreed standards

and accreditation levels. This marketplace

would operate alongside, and potentially

within, existing non-exclusive force

contracts, thereby keeping open access

to innovation, maintaining regular refresh

of the Marketplace itself, and sustaining a

level of competition as the demand for

digital forensic services develops in both

volume and capability terms.

27

https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/g-cloud/search?q=Digital+Forensics



OFFICIAL


INTRODUCTION

The Management Case identifies how to progress

and take forward the preferred option within this

Outline Business Case, Option 5 (Full Forensic

Integration), based on core programme, business

change and project management principles. The

application of these recognised principles will

enable police and the Transforming Forensics

project to deliver what is a significant and complex

change programme, whilst minimising risks and

issues where possible. These principles also

support and enable the delivery of the investment

objectives identified in the Strategic Case,

namely:

Delivering better outcomes

Supporting re-investment in priority areas

Building capability for the future


The Management Case therefore identifies, at a

summary level, the key aspects of Option 5, its

transformation and delivery plan, and the

programme, project and business change

management steps and principles that need to be

applied in order to successfully take forward this

option.

At this point it is important to note two aspects

which are significant to the Management Case:

1. Option 5 presents a significant programme of

transformation (business and technical) work

for policing, which will result in the delivery of

Forensics “as a Service” across England and

Wales. In the context of this Management

Case:

a. Programme management is defined “as the

action of carrying out the coordinated

organization, direction and implementation

of a dossier of projects and transformation

activities (i.e. the programme) to achieve

outcomes and realize benefits of strategic

importance to the business” and “It

provides a framework whereby large,

complex change can be broken down into

manageable, inter-related projects”28

. In the

case of Option 5, Transforming Forensics is

the programme and the timely delivery of

the cost savings and benefits, as defined in

the Economic Case for Option 5, defines

success.

b. Project management is defined as “A

temporary organization that is created for

the purpose of delivering one or more

business products according to an agreed

Business Case”29

. Option 5 is comprised of

several projects, which are identified later in

this section. The projects are the vehicles

by which the “to-be” state service, with its

anticipated cost savings and benefits, is

delivered within the programme.

c. A Proof of Concept (PoC) is a project

tasked with prototyping and delivering

capabilities ahead of full service delivery,

thereby allowing risks and issues to be

identified and mitigated, as well as benefits

28

https://www.axelos.com/best-practice-solutions/msp 29

https://www.axelos.com/Corporate/media/Files/Glossaries/PRINCE2-2009-Glossary-of-terms_GB-v1-1.pdf

Management Case

https://www.axelos.com/best-practice-solutions/msp

https://www.axelos.com/best-practice-solutions/msp




OFFICIAL


to be identified and maximised, in defining

and delivering the to-be service.

d. Information Technology Infrastructure

Library (ITIL) defines a Service30

as "a

means of delivering value to customers by

facilitating outcomes customers want to

achieve without the ownership of specific

costs and risks. In other words, when we do

something for another party that gives them

something they want or value, we're

providing a service”. In the context of

Transforming Forensics, the Service is the

resultant Forensic Service which shall

remain extant once the programme has

completed, noting that projects, and

therefore the programme, will deliver

incrementally – and therefore the Service

shall build incrementally.

2. This Outline Business Case has considered

a wide range of options. Option 1, for

example (had it been proposed by the

Outline Business Case) would have likely

resulted in multiple implementation projects

at a Force level, as opposed to any wider

transformation programme. This is in

contrast to the scope of work incorporated

within Option 5. Given that this is an Outline

Business Case, and not a Full Business

Case, the Management Case cannot, and

will not, define the full approach and

methodology for all of the projects within

the programme of work that is Option 5.

The Management Case will however

identify the following as an outline approach

for the programme, in particular to guide

the path to Full Business Case:

a. Current governance arrangements and

future arrangements required as

Transforming Forensics progresses.

b. Key activities required to progress

Option 5 to Full Business Case, and the

organisational structure required to

support this.

c. Business Case Governance associated

with Option 5

d. The programme structure required to

support the delivery of Option 5,

including key roles and stakeholders

e. Key practices and principles associated

with the delivery of Option 5, in

particular:

30

https://www.axelos.com/best-practice-solutions/itil/what-is-itil

i. Programme and project management

methodology

ii. Programme / project monitoring and

control

iii. Stakeholder management and

specialist advisers

iv. Key aspects of Industry engagement

associated with Option 5

v. Benefits Management

vi. Change Management

vii. Risk Management

The rest of the Management Case therefore

outlines the approach for the items listed in point

2 above.

CURRENT AND FUTURE GOVERNANCE ARRANGEMENTS

To date Transforming Forensics has been run as

a collection of projects, covering Research and

Development (R&D) and Proof of Concept (PoC)

activities. The effort to produce the Outline

Business Case has been run as one of these

projects, therefore existing governance layers

have already been built and there is value in

identifying these, such that the path to Full

Business Case submission and beyond can be

identified for Option 5.

The Transforming Forensics project is a police led

project, delivered with support from the Home

Office (HO). Both the police and HO stakeholders

have worked with a single delivery partner to

deliver the Outline Business Case content. The

organisational structure for the Outline Business

Case project is summarised, at the highest level,

in Figure 38 below:



OFFICIAL


Under this project a review and governance

structure has already emerged. The more senior

aspects of this governance structure are

summarised in the image below, noting that within

the project there is an additional layer of low-level

governance and reporting that is not identified

here:

As Transforming Forensics progresses from

Outline Business Case to Full Business Case, it is

anticipated that an additional governance forum

shall be required. Work is already underway to

look at wider governance across strategic policing

initiatives (referred to as NPCC Strategic

Capabilities Portfolio), such that an efficient

management and governance structure can be

created across multiple programmes. Therefore

this Management Case does not propose that a

new governance forum be created specifically for

Transforming Forensics. Instead the

recommendation is that Transforming Forensics

participates in this wider governance consultation

with the aim of identifying a reference group (for

onwards review, status and critique of the

programme as it moves towards a Full Business

Case) that has the participation of the following

key stakeholders as a minimum:

Senior police stakeholders (both Home Office

forces and non-Home Office forces, e.g. NCA /

MoD Police / BTP)

Criminal Justice (CJ) Agencies and Courts

Crown Prosecution Service (CPS)

Criminal Case Review Commission

Forensic Science Regulator (FSR)

Forensic Service Providers (FSP) Associations

In addition to the above senior governance forum,

as the Transforming Forensics effort continues

from Outline Business Case to Full Business

Case and onwards, additional governance will be

required at the programme and project level (i.e.

within the Transforming Forensics Programme

itself). This governance is described in the “Wider

Delivery of Option 5” section of this Management

Case.

Reporting to

police

stakeholders

Reporting to

Home Office

stakeholders

Police

forensics

experts

Home Office

and delivery

partner

personnel

Police

programme

director

Home Office

programme

director

National Police

Chiefs Council

Association of

Police and

Crime

Commissioners

Executive Review Board (ERB) –

NPCC representative – Debbie

Simpson (SRO), APCC representative

Mark Burns Williamson, shortlist of

NPCC members

Transforming

Forensics

OBC project

Transforming

Forensics

R&D projects

Transforming

Forensics

PoCs

Status and

request for

guidance and

clarification

Guidance and

direction to the

projects

Fig

ure

38:

Curr

ent

pro

ject

str

uctu

re

Fig

ure

39:

Exis

ting g

overn

ance s

tructu

re

OFFICIAL


DELIVERING OPTION 5

This section outlines the scope of Option 5 and

how current effort needs to be directed such

that the current project transitions into the

programme of activities incorporated within it.

This section also considers onward business

case governance associated with

Transforming Forensics and the wider delivery

of the programme.

THE SCOPE OF OPTION 5 (FULL FORENSIC INTEGRATION)

This option focuses on creating a single,

unified forensic service, governed and

managed at a national level with the delivery of

services occurring at a mixture of national,

regional and local levels. This service aims to

bring forensic processing as close to the scene

as possible. Key outputs from this option

include:

faster processing of forensics, via the

introduction of digital kiosks and digital

triage tools, via self-service;

opportunity to deliver some forensic

services on a 24x7 basis; and

consistent forensic intelligence services,

across boundaries to minimise and prevent

crime.

In technology terms, this option includes:

new Home Office Biometrics (HOB)

technical capabilities;

provision of a federated national login via a

front-end Forensic Portal that provides

access to a set of collaboration tools to

support policy, standards, R&D and quality

management;

networked portal applications and national

data stores for all physical and digital

forensic disciplines; and

a strategic, new national forensic work

management and intelligence capability

linked to a common family of frontline rapid

at-scene technologies.

Given that this scope presents a significant

departure from the “as-is”, careful

consideration is required to plan how the

current Transforming Forensics project (at the

point of Outline Business Case submission)

becomes a programme on its path to Full

Business Case creation and submission,

programme delivery and ultimately service

delivery.

TRANSITIONING TO OPTION 5

In creating the Transforming Forensics Outline

Business Case submission the project team

has identified a transition path for Option 5.

This transition path is detailed in Appendix B-

5. In summary, the transition path for Option 5

outlines:

a single project, in its own right, associated

with delivering the Transforming Forensics

Full Business Case – herein referred to as

the “Full Business Case project”;

a single project, in its own right, associated

with planning the wider implementation and

delivery of the Transforming Forensics

capability (the projects and PoCs detailed

below) – herein referred to as the

“Transition project”;

projects associated with introducing

capability to the delivery locations inherent

within Option 5 – herein referred to as the

“Delivery projects”; and

PoCs associated with introducing capability

to the forward and delivery inherent within

Option 5 – herein referred to as the “PoCs”.

The transition path therefore shows that

Option 5 will soon become a programme in its

own right, given that it will be comprised of

many projects, delivering in parallel. Given that

initially the focus of the programme will be on

the Full Business Case and Transition

projects, ahead of wider implementation, it is

necessary to consider an interim programme

organisation. This interim programme

organisation will, initially, be comprised of only

two projects:

a. A project with the remit of delivering

the Transforming Forensics Full

Business Case – the Full Business

Case project

OFFICIAL


b. A project tasked with developing,

defining and delivering the wider

transition path for Option 5 – the

Transition project.

Whilst at face value there is a degree of

overlap between these projects, there is clear

rationale for running them as discrete items

under a single Programme Director (PD):

The skill sets required to prepare and

deliver a Full Business Case are different

from those needed to define and plan a

programme of work. Consequently, the

teams are likely to be staffed from

different organisations, where:

the Full Business Case project team will

be staffed by a mixture of police and

external consulting support;

the Transition project team will be more

business-focussed and, as such, have

significant representation of police and

forensic staff.

The Full Business Case team will have a

near-term focus, associated with maturing

the Outline Business Case proposition into

a more detailed analysis of Option 5 –

ultimately delivering this as a Full Business

Case, whereas the Transition project team

will be focussed on engagement with forces

to agree a robust and achievable plan that

forces can sign up to. This plan will focus

on longer term programme, project and

benefit delivery / realisation.

Police Transformation Funding (PTF), on

which Option 5 is dependent, is only

accessible for the next three financial

years. As such there is a clear need to

mobilise the programme rapidly.

Resourcing both teams early will allow the

programme to deliver the Full Business

Case whilst simultaneously preparing for

the wider implementation and capability

delivery activities.

The full interim programme organisation

(covering both the Full Business Case and

Transition project teams), which has been

costed into Option 5 as detailed in the

Economic Case, is detailed in Appendix E2 of

this Management Case.

As work commences on the tasks that will take

the Transforming Forensics programme to Full

Business Case and through transition

planning, it is important to acknowledge the

role of forensic Subject Matter Experts (SMEs)

or Specialist Advisers required during the next

phase. The project team responsible for

delivering the Full Business Case will require

the following specialist advisers to assist the

preparation of the Full Business Case

associated with Option 5:

1. Data Analysts – to build on the extensive

forensics data set compiled and modelled

under the Outline Business Case activities,

in support of the Option 5 definition and

lower level design. 2. Business and Technical Architects, to

progress Option 5 to a lower level design

as part of the Full Business Case

submission. 3. Economist and cost modelling resources to

develop the societal and financial costs,

benefits and risks required in the Economic

Case for the Full Business Case. 4. Human Resource (HR) professionals.

Option 5 has significant staffing

implications, involving a large number of

resources (c5000 in the as-is). It is

therefore of vital importance that the design

of the option is shaped around a viable

personnel strategy for these staff members. 5. Stakeholder engagement personnel. Given

the impact of Option 5 on the stakeholders

identified in the previous points, and given

the wide range of “home” organisation for

these personnel (police, Home Office,

industry providers, consulting

organisation(s)) it is critically important that

stakeholder engagement and mapping is

undertaken in a coordinated fashion. 6. Legal and policy – required to guide the

planning and delivery of Option 5 and

provide guidance on any wider implications.

In addition to the above, the following

specialist advisers will be required to support

the transition project associated with Option 5:

1. Operations Manager – to support the

initiation of the management vehicle that

will underpin Option 5, agree the force

cohort that will participate within Option 5,

agree the model for estate ownership within

Option 5 and refine the definition of the

BAU organisational structure. It is important

OFFICIAL


to note that a key aspect of the transition

project (and the Full Business Case

project) is the early identification of the

force cohort that will be participating in

Option 5, and obtaining their early buy-in to

the programme of work.

2. HR Professional / Recruiter – to support the

identification of staff roles required, write

terms of reference and job specs for each

role, manage the recruitment and on-

boarding of resources and manage the

wider staff consultancy process. This is of

particular importance given the degree of

transformational change associated with

Option 5.

3. Police estate and facilities management –

to produce the estates strategy associated

with Option 5, identify potential premises

suitable to meet the option needs,

negotiate leases with buildings and facilities

providers, and facilitate the potential exit

from existing leased premises.

4. Communications and stakeholder

engagement resources to lead on engaging

with police resources and stakeholders

through the planning activities associated

with a significant business change activity.

At this point it should also be acknowledged

that particular emphasis will be required in the

Full Business Case project on the Commercial

Case, and that in particular strong commercial

leadership will be required in conjunction with

efforts / input from the Forensic Marketplace

Strategy Group (FMSG) and Collaborative Law

Enforcement Programme (CLEP). The Outline

Business Case’s Commercial Case has

documented that:

There is no coordinated strategic approach

currently being actioned with the forensics

industry.

The forensic market is dominated by a

small handful of key players.

These key players are already locked into

long (3 years+) frameworks / contracts of a

varying nature

Introducing changes into the marketplace

runs the risk of a duopoly, or even a

monopoly developing in some areas.

As such, a conscious decision of Outline

Business Case activities has been to only

engage with industry representatives (trade

organisations, affiliations) and not suppliers

directly until such time that:

A preferred option emerges through the

Outline Business Case review and approval

process, which has buy-in from key

governance forums (NPCC, APCC, Home

Office, SRO etc.).

The Full Business Case and transition

teams have planned, and coordinated the

sequence of tasks and activities required to

appropriately engage with industry on

Option 5.

The management actions identified in the

Commercial Case therefore call out the

following items as key actions to engage with

industry going forward:

Option 5 FBC Effort

Option 5 Transition Planning

Project

Planning

Project

Planning

Project

Planning

Project

Delivery

Project Delivery

Project Delivery

Programme Delivery

Option 5 –

Programme FBC

SubmissionProgramme

Comprehensive

Estimate At

Complete (CEAC)

Programme CEAC

Project monitoring and control

YR1 YR2

Fig

ure

40:

Pro

gra

mm

e F

BC

govern

ance

OFFICIAL


1. To establish the Transforming Forensics

programme, such that central control can

be established on the terms and execution

of contracts yet to be awarded.

2. To operationalise the FMSG and to

consolidate the roles of the Strategy Group

to manage the commercial activities and

oversight required to deliver Option 5 with

the Forensics industry.

BUSINESS CASE GOVERNANCE ASSOCIATED WITH OPTION 5

Given that Option 5 represents a significant

transformation programme for policing, it is

important to consider how individual projects

within the programme shall be approved,

monitored and controlled. Agreeing this

process, even at an Outline Business Case

stage, is key to setting expectations on

governance and accountability as the

programme progresses.

Figure 40 above summarises the proposed

approach for governance, at the highest level,

within the programme that will deliver Option 5.

The next phase of activities, post Outline

Business Case submission and review, will

see the programme work towards a Full

Business Case. As per HM Treasury green

book guidance31

, the following are key tenets

of the Full Business Case deliverable

associated with the next phase of work:

The Full Business Case “takes place within

the procurement phase of the project,

following detailed negotiations with

potential service providers/suppliers prior to

the formal signing of contracts and the

procurement of goods and services”

“The purpose of the Full Business Case is to revisit the Outline Business Case and record the findings of the subsequent procurement activities; together with the recommendation for an affordable solution which continues to optimise value for money, and detailed arrangements for the successful delivery of required goods and

31

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/190609/Green_Book_guidance_short_plain_English_guide_to_assessing_business_cases.pdf

implementation of services from the recommended supplier/s”.

Given that Transforming Forensics is a business change programme, with projects spanning many years, it is likely that the Full Business Case submission will be predominantly focussed on the refinement of Option 5 to a low level of detail, with its cost / benefits / risk analysis updated to reflect this. Supplier engagement at the Full Business Case stage will likely be centred on two aspects: 1. Work undertaken in the Full Business Case

project to make industry aware of the aims / scope of the Transforming Forensics programme, and to solicit its feedback (and document this).

2. Industry proposals / negotiations and agreed positions on the scope associated with near-term projects within the programme, and how these proposals from the recommended suppliers fit within the overall scope. It is not anticipated that the Full Business Case will contain details of source selection / procurement activities for projects in the latter years of the programme – as it would not be feasible / viable to work these aspects until such time that they are needed.

Accordingly, the following updates (as

compared to the Outline Business Case) are

expected in the Full Business Case:

The Strategic Case – revisited and updated

as required.

The Economic Case – updated to reflect

the outcome of procurement activities for

near term projects in the analysis and

outcomes.

The Commercial Case – updated to reflect

the recommended deal(s) and the industry

engagement to date. Identification of likely

future procurement activities.

The Financial Case – updated to resolve

any affordability and/or funding issues.

The Management Case – updated to reflect

the detailed plans for delivery and

arrangements for realisation.

It is anticipated that, with the Transforming

Forensics programme being a police-led

initiative, the NPCC and APCC governance

forums shall remain the appropriate boards for

sign-off of the Full Business Case and it is

reasonable to expect that the sign-off of the





OFFICIAL


Full Business Case shall therefore baseline

the following key programme aspects:

The programme objectives and

requirements, tied to key benefits that will

be delivered. These items should be

mapped to the projects that shall deliver

each of these items.

The programme cost profile, covering both

implementation (transition) and run costs,

again mapped to project budgets.

The programme funding profile, identifying

the funding streams associated with the

cost profile.

The programme risk profile, with

responsible stakeholders identified within

the programme organisation to own the

risk(s), and with suitable mitigation plans

developed.

The programme plan baselined,

underpinned by project schedules, with

aligned inter-dependencies, constraints and

deliverables.

Documented programme assurance plans,

detailing the programme assurance

approach and how each of the projects

aligns to the approach, with agreed

assurance requirements levied onto the

projects.

However, it does need to be recognised that

Option 5 will be a multi-year delivery

programme, comprised of several projects and

PoCs. It should therefore be acknowledged

that, as with any proposition, the further in the

future estimates are made, the higher the

degree of uncertainty that will be associated

with those estimates.

Therefore a recommendation of this

Management Case is that the Transforming

Forensics programme follows a similar model

to other police / Home Office programmes in

that post-Full Business Case sign-off the

programme enters a yearly funding review and

approvals governance cycle. As part of this

governance cycle the programme will

undertake a Comprehensive Estimate At

Complete (CEAC) activity to confirm:

progress made to date, vs progress

anticipated in the baseline programme

schedule;

actuals incurred to date within the

programme;

Estimate To Complete (ETC) for the

programme;

benefits and deliverables delivered or to

be delivered by the programme; and

variances from the programme Full

Business Case position (to be reviewed

/ approved by the NPCC / APCC

governance bodies).

The completion of this yearly activity will

provide reporting status to key stakeholders

and identification of any variances to the Full

Business Case position. This reporting cycle

will also allow for short to mid-term financial

planning and anticipated usage of funds (i.e.

forecasting usage of Police Transformation

Funds). It is important to note, that through the

governance forums previously identified (ERB

/ NPCC / APCC) interim updates shall be

given on the status of the programme, so this

yearly review cycle is not the only forum for

programme status to external stakeholders.

The yearly funding review cycle does however

force the programme to perform a CEAC

activity on an annual basis, and identify

variances against the baseline Full Business

Case position where appropriate.

A recommendation of this business case is

that the individual projects submit a Full

Business Case for their scope, post the

Transforming Forensics programme Full

Business Case submission and sign-off, and

after their respective (project) planning

activities have completed. The project-level

Full Business Case shall be signed-off within

the programme, assuming that the parameters

of the project Full Business Case (i.e. cost /

schedule / benefit requirements) are within the

sign-off of the programme. The review and

approval of project Full Business Cases within

the programme shall ensure that:

The project has been correctly allocated its

portion of the programme objectives,

requirements and anticipated benefits, and

that these have suitably derived such that

the project has a clear scope for delivery.

The project can deliver these objectives,

requirements and benefits within its

allocated cost profile, and that this cost

profile fits within the overall programme

OFFICIAL


profile (which will be particularly important

for projects whose planning activities start a

significant time after programme Full

Business Case submission).

That the project risk profile is correct, the

risks are correctly apportioned between the

programme and project and risk owners /

mitigation plans are correctly assigned and

understood.

The project schedule is adequately

determined, with deliverables and inter-

dependencies baselined and agreed within

the wider programme.

Assurance plans relevant to the project in

hand have been captured and baselined,

such that they support the over-arching

programme assurance plan.

Lastly, a project Full Business Case update

and submission, once approved, will give

each Project Manager clear responsibility

to deliver and execute against a baseline

within their control, as delegated from the

Programme Director.

As projects execute their scope of work, they

provide frequent (monthly) updates to the

programme on their cost and deliverable

status. These updates provide the programme

with up to date status and forecast information,

from which an overall programme status can

be formed. Thus the programme, and its wider

stakeholder, can be appraised of progress.

WIDER DELIVERY OF OPTION 5

Whilst the activities within the Full Business

Case and Transition project will document and

baseline the wider programme approach to

delivering Option 5, it is important to consider

and agree a high-level approach for

programme execution, such that planning

activities can commence and stakeholders

(both internal and external) are aware of how

the programme intends to proceed.

There is a wealth of documented programme

management and project management good

practice and guidance available to UK Central

Government organisations and it is important

to identify the aspects that are applicable to

the delivery of Option 5 and the Transforming

Forensics programme. It is not, however, the

intention of this Outline Business Case to

provide detail on the good practice / process

itself – as these artefacts are readily available

elsewhere.

This section of the Management Case will,

however, define the aspects that are

applicable to the delivery of Option 5. In doing

this, the key aspects of the transition path for

Option 5 (as identified in Appendix B-5) and

the anticipated wider delivery workstreams (as

detailed in Appendix E) have been taken into

consideration. It is envisaged that the delivery

areas detailed in Appendix E would be a

programme organisation in its own right, as

opposed to operating within a ‘lead force’

model, owing to the size, complexity and risk

associated with Option 5.

PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT

The Cabinet Office32

advocates the use of

Managing Successful programmes (MSP) as

best management practice for the delivery of

programmes and there are key aspects of this

guidance that shall be of particular importance

to Option 5. In particular, MSP provides

guidance on:

How to organise the programme to ensure

clear lines of communication and

stakeholder engagement.

How to plan effort to ensure results are

achieved and benefits are realised.

The management of risks, issues,

assumptions and dependencies within a

programme.

Ensuring quality/assurance of the

programme deliverables.

The creation of audit mechanisms to

ensure standards and processes are being

followed.

Importantly, the MSP guidance articulates how

to approach programme management

throughout the full lifecycle (“cradle to grave”),

meaning that this guidance should be adopted

post-Outline Business Case submission, such

that programme aims and benefits can be

captured early – ahead of any project planning

activities.

32

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/best-management-practice-portfolio/about-the-office-of-government-commerce




OFFICIAL


In addition, MSP provides significant guidance

on:

transitioning between ‘old’ and ‘new’ ways

of working;

benefits definition, management and

realisation; and

programme planning and control.

All of these are clearly key aspects of Option

5, and as such it is important that the

programme is managed and governed within a

framework (MSP) that acknowledges this from

the outset. In addition, all of the aspects

defined under the MSP guidance are key

tenets of the PRINCE2 methodology, outlined

below. As such, the adoption of these two

guidelines (MSP for programme management

and PRINCE2 for project management) will

ensure that the programme as a whole can be

defined, developed and executed in a

consistent and coordinated fashion.

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

The Cabinet Office33

advocates the use of Projects IN Controlled Environments (PRINCE2) as a best management practice for the delivery of individual projects. PRINCE2 is a project management framework that provides a tailorable method to approach project delivery. Similar to MSP, the PRINCE2 methodology covers the totality of the project lifecycle and through its methodology there are key aspects of the PRINCE2 approach that would align well with both the wider MSP guidance adopted by the Transforming Forensics programme and the needs / requirements of the projects inherent within Option 5. Specifically, PRINCE2 outlines the need for: A Benefits Review Plan (BRP), which in the

context of a project within Option 5 would

tie to the overall Transforming Forensics

Benefits Realisation Plan (i.e. the project

BRP would detail how it anticipates

meeting the Benefits allocated to it within

the programme realisation plan).

A Business Case – as detailed in the

Business Case Governance section of this

33


Management Case, the validation of project

Full Business Cases is going to be vital in

assuring that the baseline programme Full

Business Case is not exceeded / fails to

deliver the anticipated results. By ensuring

that each project delivers and maintains its

own business case, via the PRINCE2

methodology, ongoing confidence can be

built and maintained in the anticipated

outcomes of the programme Full Business

Case.

PRINCE2 methodology requires project

managers to build and maintain project

artefacts, all of which will be key “feeds” or

“inputs” to the wider programme artefacts,

as outlined in MSP. Examples of these

artefacts include:

Communications Strategies

Configuration Item Records and

Configuration Management Strategies

Project risk registers

The ability to break down Option 5 into multiple

projects will bring other advantages that de-

risk the delivery programme:

By delivering multiple smaller projects the

programme avoids a ‘big bang’ scenario,

where all benefits / key outcomes are tied

to the success of a single milestone.

The transformation can be delivered to

policing in an incremental nature. For

example, changes to frontline activities can

be broken down into logical groupings of

events that happen over time, enabling

better adoption.

Over time, the Programme Director and other

governance members will have the ability to

amend the scope / phasing of Option 5 by

amending the projects within it. Scope could

be added or removed from the programme,

either by adding or removing projects

respectively or changing the deliverables

within them.




OFFICIAL


APPENDIX A – STRATEGIC CASE

APPENDICES

This section has been intentionally left blank.

APPENDIX B – ECONOMIC CASE

APPENDICES

B-1 – EXPERT GROUP REPRESENTATION

The following forensic specialisms were represented in the group:

Toxicology

Footwear and Drugs

Firearms

Fingerprint Enhancement Labs

DNA and RapidDNA

Digital Forensics

Performance

Quality and CSI

Innovation

FFLM Update

Fingerprints

SFR

Marketplace

Other attendance:

Home Office

HOB

FDB

College of Policing

NABIS

CLEP

Appendices

OFFICIAL


B-2 – TRANSITION ROADMAP FOR OPTION 2 “UTILISE ENABLERS”

Transition Mapping Logic

FBC

This work is anticipated to run over approximately 8 months, although it is not anticipated that it will

require full time activity from all roles to create an FBC for this option.

Transition

A transition team will be established to:

Resource forensic co-ordination roles. Roles would be identified, specified and resourced to own

coordination across the forces in the areas of Policy, Quality Management, Marketplace, R&D and

Forensic Expertise.

Establish the programme. Set up and on board the programme team for delivery of the common

Fingerprint Bureaux process project.

De-risk early delivery. Kick off the early fingerprint planning and force engagement work.

Programme Delivery

The following is commentary on the project delivery activity:

Common Fingerprint Process Project. This would start part-way through the FBC activity, in order

to allow sufficient time to make the tactical changes to the process with all bureaux prior to

decommissioning the IDENT1 system in 2019.

Legacy work

R&D Project. This would continue to run to its conclusion and the outcome will feed into the FBC.

Met Digital Proof of Concept. This would continue to run to its conclusion and the outcome will

feed into the FBC.

Traditional Forensics Rapid Forensics Proof of Concept. This would continue to run to its

conclusion and the outcome will feed into the FBC.

Assumptions

1 The number of Fingerprint bureaux remains as it currently is, no rationalisation activity is required

for transition.

2 There is no impact on T&Cs hence there will be no Union involvement in transition.

3 Business change effort is costed in to the project, which assumes 3 FTEs over 2 years.

4 The HOB programme will provide training to support the use of the new HOB Matcher tool and so,

is not reflected in the transition for this option.

Risks

1 There is a risk that the necessary funding for Transforming Forensics work will not be gained in

time to complete the FP Bureaux service continuity work in time for the IDENT1 decommissioning

date.

2 There is a risk that staff being made available to implement business changes will result in some

operational demand not being met.

OFFICIAL


B-3 – TRANSITION ROADMAP FOR OPTION 3 “MAXIMISE THE NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE”


FBC

This work would plan the introduction of the forensic support services in detail.

Transition


Resource forensic coordination roles. Roles would be identified, specified and resourced to own

coordination across the forces in the areas of Policy, Quality Management, Marketplace, R&D and

Forensic Expertise.

Establish the programme. Set up and onboard the programme team for delivery of the common

Fingerprint Bureaux process project.

De-risk early delivery. Kick off the early fingerprint planning and force engagement work.

Programme Delivery


Common Fingerprint Process Project. This would need to start part-way through the FBC process

to allow sufficient time to make the tactical changes to the process with all bureaux before the

IDENT1 system is decommissioned in 2019.

Set up of support services. Force coordination leads in the areas of Policy, R&D, Quality, Forensic

Expertise and Marketplace services would set up the supporting services, with assistance from the

transition and programme team. This activity is required to commence after the Full Business Case

has concluded, as the latter would inform the operating model for these services and the funding

structure.

Legacy work

R&D Project. Would continue to run to its conclusion and the outcome will feed into the FBC.

Met Digital Proof of Concept. Would continue to run to its conclusion and the outcome will feed into

the FBC.

OFFICIAL


Traditional Forensics Rapid Forensics Proof of Concept. Would continue to run to its conclusion

and the outcome will feed into the FBC.

Assumptions

1 The number of Fingerprint bureaux remains as it currently is, and no rationalisation activity is

required for transition.

2 There is no impact on staff terms and conditions, and hence there will be no requirement for trade

union involvement in transition.

3 Business change effort is costed in to the project, which assumes 3 FTEs over 2 years.

4 The HOB programme will provide training to support the use of the new HOB Matcher tool, so the

cost of this is not reflected in the transition for this option.

Risks



date.



B-4 – Transition Roadmap for Option 4 “Aggregate service delivery”


FBC


Transition


Identify delivery centres. This activity will commence during the development of the FBC as

information regarding costs, locations and availability of skills will be required to inform the FBC.

OFFICIAL


Once the FBC concludes, further Delivery Centre work would be required, for example identifying

and securing the premises ready for transition.


coordination across the forces in areas of Policy, Quality Management, Marketplace, R&D and

Forensic Expertise.

Set up programmes. Set up and on board the x5 programme teams for delivery of the projects in

each of the super-regions.

Define roles and responsibilities, and commence recruitment and onboarding activities. . These

activities will be required to start once a conclusion has been reached from the FBC activity, not

before, so that funding is approved for the transition activity to commence.

Commence Force Engagement. Commence force engagement work for aggregation activities.

Programme Delivery


Common fingerprint process project and tactical changes to fingerprint bureaux. These activities

are still needed despite a move to aggregate fingerprint bureaux as IDENT1 will be

decommissioned before forces have moved to an aggregated model. Consequently tactical,

interim changes are still required.

Set up of Support Services. Force coordination leads in the areas of Policy, R&D, Quality, Forensic


transition and programme team. This activity is required to come after the FBC has concluded, as

this would inform the operating model for these services and the funding structure.

Super-regional implementation. Transition will occur in sequence, with overlapping start and end

dates. It is anticipated that it would take approximately two years for each super-region to

complete transition and that overlapping transition for some super-regions is possible in order to

complete aggregation in the shortest realistic time with the resources that would be available to

assist in the transition. This approach will allow capacity to be managed whilst ongoing operational

demands are met.

Legacy work



the FBC.



Assumptions

1 All force forensics will not transition to super-regions at the same time; this will allow operational

policing needs to be met.

2 IDENT1 decommissioning date remains immoveable, and so requires the tactical fingerprint

bureaux changes.



4 Suitable premises exist and are available to support five super-regional locations.

Risks



date.

2 There is a risk that, due to the level of information available at the time of planning, the duration of

the transitions is longer than anticipated for each super-region, and therefore increases costs.



OFFICIAL


Virtually managed teams:Management, Enablement and Centres of Excellence for Policy, R&D, QM, SMEs, MarketplaceServices: Advisory, Accreditation

Fore

nsi

c p

roce

ssin

g se

rvic

es

Year 0 (‘17) Year 1 (‘18) Year 2 (‘19) Year 3 (‘20) Year 4 (‘21) Year 5 (‘22) Year 6 (‘23) Year 7 (’24)

OBC FBC

Project: R&D

Identify delivery centres

PoC: Met DF (legal entity)

Force R&Rs

Region 1Region 2

Region 3

Recruitment

Business Change programme team, including PMO

FY ’17/’18 FY ’18/’19 FY ’19/’20 FY ’20/’21 FY ’21/’22 FY ‘22/’23 FY ‘23/’24 FY ’24/’25

On boarding

Set up support services

Region 4Region 5

Tactical changes to all FP bureaux

Project:Plan and

implement common FP

process

IDENT1 decommissioned

Super-region 5

Super-region 4

Super-region 3

Super-region 2

Super-region 1

Consolidation of FP

Consolidation of Face

Rollout of S/M/T

Identity Resolution Bureaux

Biometrics Bureaux

Consolidation of FW

Rollout of Patterns

Consolidation of DF

Duplicate transition per Super-region

Tech integration

Common enabling services integration

Consolidation of TF

Set up R&D capability

Set up training capability

PoC: DF T2 & T3

OFFICIAL


B-5 – TRANSITION ROADMAP FOR OPTION 5 “FULL INTEGRATION”


FBC


Transition


Identify delivery centres. This activity will commence during the development of the FBC as

information regarding costs, locations and availability of skills will be required to inform the FBC.

Once the FBC concludes, further Delivery Centre work would be required, for example identifying

and securing the premises ready for transition.


coordination across the forces in areas of Policy, Quality Management, Marketplace, R&D and

Forensic Expertise.

Set up programme. Set up and on-board the programme team for delivery of the projects.

Define roles and responsibilities, and commence recruitment and onboarding activities. These

activities will be required to start, once a conclusion has been reached from the FBC activity not

before, so that funding is approved for this activity to be able to commence.

Commence force engagement. Commence force engagement work for integration activities.

Programme Delivery


Common fingerprint process project and tactical changes to fingerprint bureaux. These activities

are still needed despite a move to aggregate fingerprint bureaux as IDENT1 will be

decommissioned before forces have moved their fingerprint services to a super-regional model.

Consequently, tactical, interim changes are still required.

Set up of Support Services. Force coordination leads in the areas of Policy, R&D, Quality, Forensic


transition and programme team. This activity is required to come after the FBC has concluded, as

this would inform the operating model for these services and the funding structure.

Waves 1-3. Transition will occur in three waves to minimise the impact on daily operational

requirements and maintain service continuity. One transitional wave will complete before the next

commences, so as to ensure the availability of resources to support the transition. Services that

form the activities within each wave have been categorised in each wave depending on immediacy

of the need for those services to change, and to gain sizeable benefits from the changes as early

as possible.

Common Footwear Project. Will occur in advance of the integration of the footwear services

(Waves 1-3), to test the approach to consolidating Footwear processes and technology, to ensure

the most effective processes are used for the future Footwear service.

Training Capability. Occurs as part of Wave 1 transition activities as training will be required for

many following the transition. It can only be set up once the Expertise / SMEs coordinating function

has been setup, so that requirements can be captured holistically.

Cross-Border Intelligence Service. Can commence once the majority of the first wave of transition

activity has been transitioned, as the integration of some forensic services is required to produce

cross-border view.

Digital Forensics T2&T3 Proof of Concept (PoC). This activity will test and identify how central

processing for Digital Forensics will occur at tiers 2 and 3 of delivery, before migrating these

activities from forensics (wave 1), forces/ROCUs (wave 2) and the NCA/others (wave 3) into one

integrated service.

Proof of Concepts for front-line activities. These are needed in advance of their respective

transition activities to test the approach to integration and inform transition plans.

Transition delivery of TF Scene work to new ‘service’. This comprises the transition of CSI activity

to the integrated service model and occurs after the roll out of the scene technology infrastructure.

This is so that staff can get used to conducting their jobs within the new model with the right tools

available. Transition to the new model will occur force by force, or by groups thereof.

OFFICIAL


Roll out of single tasking system. This transition activity will move tasking of CSIs to a central

system. It can only start once the CSI staff have been transitioned to the new service activity

occurs. Transition to the new system will occur force by force, or by groups thereof. The timing will

depend on agreement with the respective forces.

Legacy work



the FBC.



Assumptions

1 Force forensics will not transition at the same time, to continue to meet operational policing needs.

2 IDENT1 decommissioning date remains immoveable, and so requires the tactical fingerprint

bureaux changes.



4 One of the 3 delivery facilities is available in the police estate for use

Risks



date.

2 There is a risk that, due to the level of information available at the time of planning, the duration of

the transitions is longer than anticipated for each super-region, and therefore increases costs.

3 St There is a risk that staff being made available to implement business changes will result in

some operational demand not being met.

OFFICIAL


OFFICIAL


B-6 – FULL INTEGRATION SERVICE MODEL (OPTION 5)

This appendix provides details of the service model that was created in order to be able to specify (a)

a potential future organisation and (b) a best case transformation plan (seen in B-5); ultimately for the

sole purpose of developing costs and assessing the benefits.

High Level View

The graphic below depicts the high level areas of the service model, with corresponding details

provided in the table beneath.

OFFICIAL


Service Area Description Examples

Back office The back office, also referred to as

operations, is the area of the

business responsible for activities

related to the running of the

organisation. Due to the skills

needed, back office functions do

not need to be physically located

with any of the casework delivery

locations, providing opportunities

to be located in cost efficient

location(s).

• Enabling services such as IT,

Estates, Finance, HR, Legal,

and Security

• Forensic specialists who

manage strategy in areas such

as policy, training, R&D, Quality

Management and the

Marketplace

• Programme teams who are

responsible for delivering

change

Forensic

casework

This area is responsible for

delivering customers’ forensic

requirements, from scene work

through to the provision of forensic

results to investigators and

casefiles to the CJS.

• Scene investigation support

• Traditional forensics

• Digital forensics

• Identity resolution

• Scene reconstruction

• Work management

Forensic

intelligence

This area is responsible for the

collection, analysis, and

exploitation of information in

support of law enforcement and

national security objectives.

• Value-add services that provide

links across people networks,

forensic disciplines and cases.

User case

services

These services will be accessed

by ‘users’, i.e. police investigators,

victims and witnesses, to gain or

provide information or evidence

relating to a crime.

• Information services regarding

how to protect the crime scene,

how to find out the progress of

a forensic case, and what the

progress a forensic case is.

User

intelligence

services

These services will be accessed

by users who require the analysis

and exploitation of data.

• Information services such as

how can we relate these

people, exhibits and scenes via

forensic analysis across all the

disciplines

OFFICIAL


Mid-Level View

The graphic below shows the service areas within the scope of transformation

OFFICIAL


Customer Interface View

The graphic below highlights the key user interfaces into the service for front-line staff, victims and

witnesses.

OFFICIAL


Low Level View

The graphic below shows further detail of the elements that form each forensic service area for this

option.

OFFICIAL


B-7 – ECONOMIC CASE – DATA SOURCES

Force/Collaboration selection

A sample comprising 11 forensic support units was selected following a force profiling exercise to

ensure that a representative sample from England, Wales and Northern Ireland were chosen given

the limited time and resources available. This exercise drew on census data and the “Most Similar

Groups” framework developed by the Home Office, ACPO, HMIC and industry partners. Additional

considerations were taken into account for the profiles, which included whether the forensic support

unit was part of collaboration or not, total volume of crime per region, how many specialist forensics

services were outsourced and what forensics case management software was used. Importantly,

forensic support unit willingness to engage in the TF project was also taken into consideration initially.

The outcome of the profiling exercise identified 24 individual constabularies from England, Wales and

Northern Ireland (some forming part of collaborations) that were selected to receive questionnaires

and visits. Additionally, British Transport Police (BTP) and the National Crime Agency (NCA) were

selected for data collection due to their profiles, but were not visited.

The full list of FSUs engaged in the data collection activities were:

Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire & Cambridgeshire

Dyfed Powys

East Midlands Special Operations Unit (EMSOU)

Greater Manchester (GMP)

Norfolk and Suffolk

Police Service Northern Ireland (PSNI)

Staffordshire

South West

Warwickshire and West Mercia

West Midlands

Yorkshire and the Humber (YatH)

BTP

NCA

Data Collection & Evaluation

During November 2016 – January 2017, a team of analysts from BAE Systems visited the selected

FSUs. They were supported on the majority of visits by Home Office colleagues and Police Service

subject matter experts (SMEs).

Whilst onsite at the FSUs, the analysts interviewed in excess of 76 Forensic Science SMEs, and

elicited qualitative information in addition to the quantitative data.

Outstanding data not available during the visits was returned to BAE Systems by the start of March

2017. Following data cleansing activities and mapping to project scope elements, additional analysis

of “As-Is” (the here and now picture of the forensic science landscape) was conducted to support the

assumptions for the future “To-Be” (future landscape) design activity.

There is no single holistic database for forensic data, nor is there a standard tool or process for the

submission and collation of FSU performance data. To overcome this issue, the data collected by the

Transforming Forensics Project was augmented from the following sources:

CIPFA (Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy)

ADR (Annual Data Return)

HMIC - Value for money profiles & Police Effectiveness

Home Office Science - CAST (Centre for Applied Science and Technology)

FMIT (Framework Management Information Tool)

Additional reports including those from the National Audit Office

OFFICIAL


For the data that was collected, the lack of standardisation meant that it was not always possible to

compare and analyse similar data sets. For example, whilst the questionnaire asked for volumes to

be recorded at exhibit level, volumes of exhibits collected at crime scenes may in reality be collated

and recorded into cases for submissions. Similarly, submissions to labs for analysis may be recorded

at case, docket, test, exhibit or item level.

The collation of data for the 13 forensic support units (11 selected for visits and additional data from

BTP and NCA) provided an evidence base which was extrapolated to provide a National picture.

CIPFA data was fundamental in providing the most suitable scoping metrics.

Data Modelling

A master data set for all 43 forces in England and Wales, PSNI, BTP and the NCA was created (46

entities in total). This provided the foundation for a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) cost model. The

ROM was developed over several weeks with input from the BAE Systems Design Team and Home

Office, to enable costs to be estimated for the 5 proposed options in the Outline Business Case.

Fundamental to the creation of the ROM was the development of a set of assumptions and forecasts.

A key consideration for the ROM model was the fact that Digital Forensics is sometimes conducted

outside of the forensic support units and within departments such as High Tech Crime Units (HTCU),

Cyber Crime Units and Intelligence departments. As these departments fall outside the remit of the

forensic support units, their activities, and budgets are not always collated in a centralised or

managed process. As a result, representative Digital Forensics data was not always collected during

forensic support unit visits, therefore data provided by the Home Office from a Digital Questionnaire

circulated in summer 2016 was used in the ROM modelling instead.

Some significant costs incurred by forensic support units are not fully recharged to the forensic

departments i.e. premises and some IT, but are absorbed by the wider force. For ROM modelling

such costs were extrapolated from whole force IT and premises CIPFA data.

The output from the data collection and analysis activities has provided input to the Economic Case

for the TF OBC. Additionally, the team’s findings have been collated into an Observations and

Analysis (O&A) spreadsheet with additional qualitative evidence from force visits.

OFFICIAL


B-9 - OPTIMISM BIAS AGAINST OPTION 5

Cap

ital Expe

nd

iture

Op

eratin

g Expe

nd

iture

Equ

ipm

en

t / De

velo

pm

en

tO

utso

urcin

gC

om

me

ntary

Co

mp

lexity o

f Co

ntract Stru

cture

22

Op

tion

5 will like

ly invo

lve m

anage

me

nt o

f mu

ltiple

year fram

ew

ork co

ntracts.

Late C

on

tractor In

volve

me

nt in

De

sign5

5

Pe

r the

Co

mm

ercial C

ase n

arrative, in

du

stry has n

ot b

ee

n in

volve

d in

the

OB

C

effo

rts to d

ate.

Po

or C

on

tractor C

apab

ilities

--

-

Go

vern

me

nt G

uid

elin

es

--

-

Disp

ute

and

Claim

s Occu

rred

--

-

Info

rmatio

n m

anage

me

nt

--

-

Oth

er (sp

ecify)

--

-

De

sign C

om

ple

xity8

2

Op

tion

5 rep

rese

nts a sign

ificant ch

ange

from

the

'as-is', bo

th in

term

s of b

usin

ess

and

tech

nical d

esign

com

ple

xity. Disaste

r Re

cove

ry (DR

) will n

ee

d to

be

con

side

red

in th

e ge

ograp

hic lo

cation

s cho

sen

un

de

r Op

tion

5.

De

gree

of In

no

vation

2-

The

Tech

nical d

esign

migrate

s Fore

nsics to

SaaS base

d so

lutio

ns

Enviro

nm

en

tal Imp

act-

--

Oth

er (sp

ecify)

--

-

Inad

eq

uacy o

f the

Bu

sine

ss Case

2-

-

Large N

um

be

r of Stake

ho

lde

rs6

8

Siginifican

t amo

un

t of P

olicin

g, Fore

nsics an

d H

O Stake

ho

lde

rs. De

tailed

analysis

of p

erso

nn

el asp

ects w

ill be

req

uire

d in

the

imp

lem

en

tation

of O

ptio

n 5 (e

.g.

TUP

E / Pe

nsio

n C

on

tribu

tion

s etc)

Fun

din

g Availab

ility5

-Th

e O

BC

has a large

relian

ce o

n P

RTB

Fun

din

g

Pro

ject M

anage

me

nt Te

am5

-

The

PM

team

is be

ing in

stantiate

d at th

e p

oin

t of FB

C w

ork startin

g, an assu

me

d

mix o

f po

lice / co

nsu

ltant staff h

as be

en

assum

ed

, wh

ich m

ay pro

ve to

be

inco

rrect.

Po

or P

roje

ct Inte

lligen

ce-

--

Oth

er (sp

ecify)

--

-

Pu

blic R

elatio

ns

--

-

Site C

haracte

ristics-

--

Pe

rmits / C

on

sen

ts / Ap

pro

vals-

--

Oth

er (sp

ecify)

--

-

Po

litical8

5

The

de

gree

of ch

ange

, and

amo

un

t of stakh

old

ers, m

ean

s that O

ptio

n 5 w

ill ne

ed

to care

fully m

anage

d / d

elive

red

.

Econ

om

ic-

--

Legislatio

n / R

egu

lation

s5

--

Tech

no

logy

55

Oth

er (sp

ecify)

--

-

Total

5327

Up

pe

r Bo

un

d O

ptim

ism B

ias (%)

Co

ntrib

uto

ry factors to

Up

pe

r Bo

un

d O

ptim

ism B

ias (%)10

Pro

cure

me

nt

Pro

ject Sp

ecific

Extern

al Influ

en

ces

Clie

nt Sp

ecific

Enviro

nm

en

t

OFFICIAL


APPENDIX C – FINANCIAL CASE APPENDICES


APPENDIX D– COMMERCIAL CASE

APPENDICES

APPENDIX D1 - CURRENT COMMERCIAL OPERATING MODEL “AS IS” ASSESSMENT

Headlines

The classic situational analysis (SWOT) indicates:

Strong foundations in national strategic and market focus

Opportunity to create competition / greater use of technology in digital forensics

Challenges in potentially unravelling recently awarded contracts

Potential challenges in securing sufficient buy in to a new transformational model

Key Police Forensic spending data points:

Total Investigative Support expenditure is falling and remains under pressure

3rd

party spend on Traditional Forensic Services is falling as a result of recent competitive procurement

activity, increased demand management, and new operating models

The in-house Police Forensics market is continuing to grow

External spending on Digital Forensic services is being captured for the first time. Expectations are that

this will continue to grow given crime trends, global market trends, advances in technology and pressures

on internal Police forensic teams

A request was placed on the programme to obtain 2015/16 CIPFA data but this is not yet available.

Market concerns raised by various stakeholders include:

Sustainability of price reductions / higher SLA’s / ever higher standards of accreditation. UK generally

considered to have low cost / high service specification and rapid response model relative to other

comparable developed countries.

Lack of consistency in accreditation across internal / external supply channels, need to reinforce

commitment of all to meeting formal standards and supporting guidance. This may ultimately contribute

to sub optimal criminal justice outcomes.

Cost of compliance / investment required to achieve accreditation considered high.

Shortage of available accreditation bodies / resources available to meet the accreditation deadlines set by

the Regulator.

Lack of statutory powers available to the Regulator have left the Regulator asserting a weaker position

than before the Home Office Forensic Science Strategy existed, compounded by delays in addressing

this through Parliament. Proxy controls through contract T&C have been used to support Regulator

provisions.

Lack of cost transparency and allocation of overhead treatment may be creating a bias toward in house

provision.

Inability of forces to breakdown costs such as buildings and IT to evidence full cost of in – house

forensics provision.

Perceived public subsidy to Police in house labs.

Framework bureaucracy and service delivery fragmentation / inefficiency associated with the expired

National Framework model, but not a view shared to the same degree by all.

Risk of long term “partnerships” with certain suppliers effectively constraining the underlying market,

freezing out innovators into a Tier 2 sub contract role at best, or no role at all.

OFFICIAL


Limited competition in Traditional Forensics, over 90% of the Police market serviced by three suppliers

and LGC in a dominant position.

Lack of direct access opportunities for SME’s / new entrants to showcase innovative new solutions,

particularly in Digital Forensics, with senior policing and police commercial decision makers.

Digital Forensic innovators potentially seeing non law enforcement channels as more attractive business

to pursue, potentially creating a resource / skills retention challenge / innovation gap for Forces in the

future.

Economics of delivery mean that collaboration between Forces (not just in procurement but in pooling

forensic and administrative resources) is essential in a 43 Force model, as exemplified in some of the

new models.



new models.


High concentration amongst 3 suppliers, reinforced by recent awards.

Little evidence of appetite from new suppliers to enter this market

Evolving from National Framework legacy to a number of new models which have yet to fully bed in. No

comparative data available to evaluate relative performance to date.

Digital Forensics

Market for external services is less mature

Services often delivered through Hi Tech crime units, not necessarily forensics

Traditional suppliers still featuring prominently in early spend analysis of Digital Forensics buying

behaviour.

Two significant collaborative contracts require further consideration

Metropolitan Police (Open to all Forces)

South West Forensics Hi Tech Crime Unit (Open to 19 Forces plus PSNI)

Two TF demonstrators in Rapid DNA / Mobile Forensics technology may drive national requirements

Significant Forensic Service Buying Collaborations

Four collaborative contracts are leading the market, with around 70% of spend

Metropolitan Police Service

EMSOU

North East

West and South Coast Consortium

OFFICIAL


Analysis

Key Data

Key Police Forensic spending data points are captured in Figure 1 below.

Total Investigative Support expenditure is falling and remains under pressure

3rd

party spend on Traditional Forensic Services is falling as a result of recent competitive procurement

activity, increased demand management, and new operating models

The in-house Police Forensics market is continuing to grow

External spending on Digital Forensic services is being captured for the first time. Expectations are that

this will continue to grow given crime trends, global market trends, advances in technology and pressures

on internal Police forensic teams

Figure D1: Police forensic spending key data trends

Data Point £M (All ex VAT) Period Trend Source

Total

Investigative

Support

Expenditure

(43 Forces)

£405M

2013/14

CIPFA Police Objective Analysis

(POS) annual data may be

distorted by overhead treatment,

underlying costs in £320M - £350M

range.

(2014 – 16 CIPFA POS data not yet

received)

External

Spend on

Traditional

Forensic

Services

£60M - £90M

2013 - 16

NAO Report, “December 2014,

confirmed via CIPFA (POS) Data

and 2015/16 FSMG spend data

Size of In-

house

Police

Forensics

market

£113M

£122M

2013/14

2014/15

CIPFA (POS) data against a limited

range of services.

(2015/16 CIPFA POS data not yet

received)

Spending on

Digital

Forensic

Services

£9.6M (3rd

Party,

plus £6.5M Capex)

£39.6M (staff costs)

2015/16

CLEP Programme Digital Forensics

Initial Briefing Paper v.3.1 (January

2017)

These data points provide a consistent historic spend picture to support broad framing of the Transforming

Forensics case. The NAO report identifies that the Home Office collects a range of data, primarily using

Force / CIPFA returns. All available data has been consolidated via the Home Office Economic / Finance

case lead and used to underpin the financial baseline used in the development of the TF OBC.

Data limitations have been well documented in various papers published between the HO, NAO, and House

of Commons Science and Technology Committee. The key focus now needs to be in establishing future

commercial arrangements which are flexible, relevant, accredited and scalable. Four overlapping drivers are

key to the Commercial Case:

service continuity and more efficient delivery of traditional forensic services,

meeting anticipated continued growth in digital forensics demand,

keeping pace with technological change and accreditation standards,

supporting wider service transformation through new operating models.

Forensic Supply Chain

The Home Office Forensic Science Strategy sets the scene around the external supply chain for both

Traditional and Digital Forensic products and services.

OFFICIAL


A mixed landscape of forensic delivery models exists, ranging from those based at an individual force level,

models based on well-developed collaborative/regional structures, to some more recent operating models

linked to wider partnership approaches. The Forensic Science Strategy sets an ambition for police forces to

have a national approach to forensic science delivery that will provide a more strategic relationship with the

forensic supply chain.

A Forensic Marketplace Strategy Group has been established under the NPCC to provide strategic oversight

of the relationship with the market, and to mitigate risk of market failure / disruption as Police Forces seek to

transform their services. The Terms of Reference for this group include the following key objectives:

Maintaining continuity and quality of forensic science supplies to forces,

Ensuring and retaining public confidence in the contribution forensic science makes to the CJS,

Ensuring value for money for the tax payer,

Enabling & supporting a sustainable and effective competitive market for Forensic Laboratory services.

Overall State of the Market

Despite documented concerns in Parliament 34

over recent years, since the closure of the Forensic Science

Service, the Forensic Marketplace Strategy Group has advised of no significant exit / closure of any of the

established UK forensic service providers. However, the Group does still consider the sustainability of the

market to be a high priority.

Concerns remain and several common themes have emerged from discussions with stakeholders on both

client and supply side of the relationship. A brief summary of the issues highlighted through these

stakeholder interactions includes the following “non-attributed” observations:

Sustainability of price reductions / higher SLA’s / ever higher standards of accreditation. UK generally

considered to have low cost / high service specification and rapid response model relative to other

comparable developed countries.

Lack of consistency in accreditation across internal / external supply channels, need to reinforce

commitment of all to meeting formal standards and supporting guidance. This may ultimately contribute

to sub optimal criminal justice outcomes.

Cost of compliance / investment required to achieve accreditation considered high.

Shortage of available accreditation bodies / resources available to meet the accreditation deadlines set by

the Regulator.

Lack of statutory powers available to the Regulator have left the Regulator asserting a weaker position

than before the Home Office Forensic Science Strategy existed, compounded by delays in addressing

this through Parliament. Proxy controls through contract T&C have been used to support Regulator

provisions.

Lack of cost transparency and allocation of overhead treatment may be creating a bias toward in house

provision.

Inability of forces to breakdown costs such as buildings and IT to evidence full cost of in – house

forensics provision.

Perceived public subsidy to Police in house labs.

Framework bureaucracy and service delivery fragmentation / inefficiency associated with the expired

National Framework model, but not a view shared to the same degree by all.

Risk of long term “partnerships” with certain suppliers effectively constraining the underlying market,

freezing out innovators into a Tier 2 sub contract role at best, or no role at all.

Limited competition in Traditional Forensics, over 90% of the Police market serviced by three suppliers

and LGC in a dominant position.

34

House of Commons Science & Technology Committee, September 2016 http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/science-and-technology-committee/news-parliament-2015/forensic-science-report-published-16-17/

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/science-and-technology-committee/news-parliament-2015/forensic-science-report-published-16-17/

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/science-and-technology-committee/news-parliament-2015/forensic-science-report-published-16-17/

OFFICIAL


Lack of direct access opportunities for SME’s / new entrants to showcase innovative new solutions,

particularly in Digital Forensics, with senior policing and police commercial decision makers.

Digital Forensic innovators potentially seeing non law enforcement channels as more attractive business

to pursue, potentially creating a resource / skills retention challenge / innovation gap for Forces in the

future.



new models.

However, there are also significant opportunities from which to build a platform for transformation. Firstly, the

fact that key suppliers are already embracing and investing in new ways of working under the latest

collaboration model contracts is significant. Secondly, the shift in demand toward Digital Forensics

represents an opportunity to re-establish a strong and sustainable competitive marketplace to support UK

law enforcement.


Since the closure of the Forensic Science Service, most external expenditure has been routed via the

National Forensic Framework Next Generation (NFFNG), and its predecessor the National Forensic

Framework Agreement (NFFA).

The NFFNG was set up in 2012 and supported delivery of 13 service Lots via 7 main suppliers. The NFFNG

expired in mid-2016 but there is still a significant “ragged end” of existing business working through the

framework pending the introduction of various replacement solutions implemented by groups of Forces.

The NFFNG was not a mandated national framework. However, with the exception of the North-East region,

the Forensic Science Strategy asserts that all forces use or have used the framework. This view is strongly

supported by the findings of the Transforming Forensics data collection template. The majority of forensic

services purchased under the NFFNG have been acquired as part of collaborative regional competitions with

standardised specifications and regional aggregated volumes. However, the forensic landscape has evolved

considerably since the introduction of these national frameworks. Police Forces are delivering more services

in-house and new types of commercial partnerships have emerged in some police regions.

The Outline Business Case development has not had direct visibility of the business case details

underpinning any of the more substantial recent contract awards / proposed awards so the evidence base

and supporting the Transforming Forensics Economic Case assumptions cannot yet be informed by such

material. The Home Office Commercial team, working with the Forensic Marketplace Strategy Group, has

delivered a report (embedded below) intended to compare the respective contract models recently

established by EMSOU and West South Coast Consortium (19 Forces), with a view to providing guidance to

other Forces as to the relative merits of different approaches.

Major NFFNG replacement contracts awarded by MPS, EMSOU, WCC, and North East effectively tie up the

traditional market until 2020 - 2024 with LGC, Cellmark and Key Forensics continuing to dominate. Figure 2

below highlights the market concentration. With the most recent contract awards, LGC have further

cemented their position as market leader by market share. All of these models go live in 2017/18 so

comparative operational data is not yet available.

Figure D2: Traditional Forensics 3rd

party spend by supplier and region

OFFICIAL


In terms of market structure, there is a high concentration ratio amongst a few established suppliers to the

Police and law enforcement sector in England and Wales, predominantly LGC, Key Forensics, and Cellmark

in the world of Traditional Forensic services. 72% of spend is accounted for under four collaborations

supplied by these companies. The most significant new collaborative contract awards in 2017 commit

business through to various dates in the 2020 – 2024 period, potentially longer with extension options.

These three major suppliers, along with the Defence Science and Technology Laboratories, and in house

Police forensic services in Eire, Northern Ireland and Scotland, have formed the Association of Forensic

14%Key Forensic

42%LGC

38%Cellmark

Traditional forensics

spend (£64M) by

supplier

(Source: 2015/16 FMSG data)

6%South West

9%Eastern

6%East Mids

26%Metropolitan

24%WCC

15%North East

7%West Mids

Traditional forensics

spend (£64M) by region

(Source: 2015/16 FMSG data)

11%South West

2%Other

OFFICIAL


Service Providers (AFSP) 35

. This organisation appears limited in membership / scope but provides an

industry interface to the Regulator.

LGC has a long association with the UK Government Sector and has hosted the function of the “Laboratory

of the Government Chemist” 36

for over 100 years. The Government Chemist function today sits within the

Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. The name LGC was adopted on privatisation in

1996 and the firm has since grown approximately 10-fold in manpower terms, as well as acquiring many

other smaller companies. LGC enjoys the dominant share (43%) of the England and Wales Police

Traditional Forensic services business, with Cellmark (37%) and Key Forensics (14%). The remaining

suppliers from the NFFNG; ESG, Arrogan, Randox, pick up a very small (6%) of the remaining business.

It is notable that when the nearest event to a retender of the NFFNG came to market, via the WSCC open

OJEU competition in Q4 2016, no new suppliers elected to bid, indicating the market is relatively closed /

unattractive for new entrants, even more so given that larger companies such as LGC and Key have

diversified their portfolio of services to create broader appeal, potentially to the exclusion of more niche

providers. Given the length of contracts entered in recent months, covering >70% of the total England and

Wales Police market for the next 3 - 7 years, potentially longer, this situation is unlikely to change.

Table 1 below summarises the broad scale and scope of the most significant recent contract awards

representing over 70% of the Traditional Forensics marketplace spend.

35

Association of Forensic Service Providers, http://afsp.org.uk/ 36

LGC website http://www.lgcgroup.com/our-science/government-chemist/#.WLcUU4XXLg8

http://afsp.org.uk/

http://www.lgcgroup.com/our-science/government-chemist/#.WLcUU4XXLg8

OFFICIAL


Table D1: Summary Table of Recent Contracts. (Capturing over 70% of total Forces spend)

Major Existing Forensic Contract Awards

Collaboration/Organisation Collaboration Scope Contract

Term

Key features

The Metropolitan Police

(Digital Forensics)

Open to all Forces in

England, Wales,

Scotland and PSNI.

Plus others such as:

British Transport

Police, Civil Nuclear

Constabulary, and UK

Border Agency.

Awarded in

Feb 2017.

Seven years

plus three

year option

Contract won by MASS as

“Managed Service Provider”. Tiers

of service: Levels 1 and 2 -

Frontline Self Service Hubs, Level

3 – Technical Services including

Case work development, Research

and Development/Consultancy and

lab based forensic analysis of

digital devices. Estimated value

£15m to £230m

The Metropolitan Police

(Traditional Forensics)

Available beyond The

Met only to London

Fire and Emergency

Planning Authority,

Greater London

Authority and

Transport for London

Awarded in

Feb 2017.

Seven years

plus three

year option

Contract won by LGC as “Managed

Service Provider”. Caters for

innovation such as Rapid DNA in

Custody Suits within 1 year and

Rapid DNA at crime scene within 3

to 5 years. Estimated value £75m

to £111m

East Midlands SOU – FS


Open to Derbyshire,

Nottinghamshire,

Lincolnshire

Leicestershire and

Northamptonshire

Police Forces

Awarded

January

2017, with

Go-Live on

1st April

2017.

Contract

term: Seven

years plus

three year

option.

Partnering arrangement awarded

to Cellmark. Approx. 94% to be

delivered by Cellmark with the

balance by sub-contractors.

Primarily Traditional Forensics but

with limited Digital (training and

consultancy, provided by

Intaforensics). Est Value: £35 over

ten years. 10% cashable savings in

Year 1and 9.6% savings predicted

for Year 2. Significant back office

savings e.g. 240 invoices pa to 12

pa.

West and South Coast

Consortium (W&SCC)


Nineteen Forces (A&S,

BTP, Cheshire,

Cumbria, D&C, Dorset,

Dyfed, Glous, GMP,

Gwent, Hants, Mersey,

N Wales, S Wales,

Surrey, Sussex, TVP,

Wilts) Also available to

PSNI although not part

of the Consortium.

Contract

terms;

3 years

from 1 April

2017 with

optional 2

year

extension

Contractual model of category 8

Lots and 2-5 suppliers per Lot.

Suppliers either allocated a specific

Force or a percentage of Force

business. Main suppliers: Key

Forensics, LGC and Cellmark.

Standard specifications across all

Forces. Accreditation as advised

by Regulator, UKAS and Home

Office. Pricing based on Service

codes and consistent across all

Forces. Spend estimated at £23m

pa based on 2015/16 data.

Savings in year 1 estimated at 25%

(PACE sample price reduction from

£17-£22 to £12.80 as example)

OFFICIAL


North East Consortium


Seven Forces (West

Yorkshire, North

Yorkshire, South

Yorkshire,

Humberside,

Cleveland,

Northumbria, Durham)

Five years

plus 2

optional

extension.

Awarded

Sept 2013

The Forces have been

collaborating since the closure of

the FSS. Contractual model of five

Lots (PACE, Volume crime

including DNA, Drugs, Toxicology,

Case Work). LGC sole supplier,

apart from niche services such as

Fire or archaeology. Lots 1 to 4

paid for on a case by case basis,

Lot 5 (Casework) paid as lump

sum (£500k pm). Spend estimated

at £10pa with discount structure

applying at spend over £10m.

Seven individual contracts but

pricing consistent across all seven.

Pricing fixed for five years,

adjustments agreed in light of

experience e.g. new drug driving

legislation. No single contract

manager – monthly meetings with

individual Forces, West Yorks

manage on behalf of other

Yorkshire Forces and Humberside.

Digital Forensics

For Digital Forensics, the approach to acquiring / delivering service is less mature and represents a

significant opportunity to cultivate a much more competitive marketplace strategy. There is a varied

approach to the way services are procured and delivered today. In some forces, digital forensics are

delivered through forensic departments; in others, it is part of a high-tech crime unit or intelligence bureaux.

Most forces have invested in providing Digital Forensics in-house, but the growth in demand means they

often use external suppliers when internal resource cannot meet demand or to clear a backlog. This leads to

external digital services being procured in an ad hoc manner, which may not represent good value for money

over the longer term. There is also an argument that the pace of technological change may make it

increasingly difficult for in house

capabilities to keep up.

The Collaborative Law Enforcement

Programme (CLEP) has undertaken

a survey pulling together, for the first

time, the national landscape of Digital

Forensics spending and procurement

activity across policing, drawing data

from 41 Forces plus several other law

enforcement organisations. The

findings are captured in a

comprehensive paper entitled Digital

Forensics Initial Briefing Paper

v3.1 (January 2017), intended to

assist the TF project by identifying

priority areas for follow up. Figure 4 below shows the reported 2015 / 16 distribution across 3rd

party spend

(£9.6M), capex (£6.5M) and (£39.6M) internal staff costs.

Source: 2015/16 CLEP Survey

Internal staffing 71%

17%

12%

3rd party

Capex

Figure D4: Police Spending on Digital Forensics

OFFICIAL


The Commercial Case adopts this work as a foundation layer product to support ongoing development of

category management 37

strategy for forensic products and services. The NPCC sponsored CLEP

Programme is fundamentally driven by the principles of standardisation, aggregation, and collaboration. As

such the continued development of this research provides a sound base from which to develop future

category management strategy for all of the Options under consideration.

The NPCC research identifies that the market for Digital Forensics is a potentially more competitive

landscape than traditional forensics, this is supported by wider market data. However, in the case of larger

service providers the line is becoming somewhat blurred between traditional and digital service provision,

with some companies handling both, consequently sweeping up a significant share of the overall police

market available today. The remaining players may be more constrained to specialist equipment and / or

services. The breakdown of recorded spend in 2015/16 by supplier, further confirms the current role of LGC

and Key Forensics as potentially dominant suppliers in the digital space too, although 73 suppliers in total

are identified. Cellebrite and MSAB take a combined 60% share on mobile device kiosk technology. The

data points and estimates created through this initial research into Digital Forensics spending patterns

should be treated with caution given this is the first attempt to capture such data. This work will need to be

reassessed and repeated as part of a focused MI sub category strategy over a sustained period of time.

The research goes on to identify 39 contracts for procuring relevant equipment and services of which only 7

are open to collaborating Forces, with 1 national agreement. In additional, there are a limited range of digital

forensic service capabilities and equipment / licencing options available through the Crown Commercial

Service Frameworks and Digital Marketplace. These contracts cover a variety of operating model scenarios

and the natural next step would be to consolidate evidence / data points to support future procurement

intelligence, VFM and performance benchmarking and pipeline development. This material can then be

packaged into customer / user facing decision support collateral championed by the Forensic Marketplace

Strategy Group.

Forensic Marketplace Strategy Group research in 2015 38

indicated little appetite from Forces to become

suppliers to other Forces using their respective in sourced capabilities.

There is no consolidated view currently available with respect to the future market spend / demand profile for

either traditional or digital forensic services. However, the various TF pilot / demonstrator projects may

provide some helpful volumetrics in this regard since some of the new contracts and fee structures are

predicated on a view of volumes of case referrals. The Forensic Marketplace Strategy Group is developing a

view to inform future work, including 2017/18 spend plans, but this has not yet been made available to

support the OBC.

The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) has potentially broken new ground in its recent (January 2017)

contract award to MASS 39

(Cohort plc). The contract is structured around three service lots. The contract

has a seven year term (plus potential for three year extension). OJEU value range is £15M - £230M as the

contract is open to all Forces. There are no guaranteed volumes. The three service lots are:

Frontline Self Service Equipment

Frontline Supported Service

Lab & Development Services

37

Category Management overview based on one of many available approaches available in the marketplace http://www.futurepurchasing.com/category_management/5_step_process 38

Forensic Marketplace Commercial Strategy & Tactical Planning Workshop 18th February 2015

39 MASS news release http://mass.co.uk/about-us.asp#sec5

http://www.futurepurchasing.com/category_management/5_step_process

http://mass.co.uk/about-us.asp#sec5

OFFICIAL


The MPS contract supports a Transforming Forensics kiosk “Proof of Concept” collaboration project with

Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Kent and Essex Police Forces. The Forensic Marketplace team

has intelligence supporting the view that many other Forces may see benefit in adopting this solution.

The South West Forensics Hi Tech Crime Unit hosts a further multi Force contract for Digital Forensic

services, open to 19 Forces plus PSNI.

West Yorkshire Police is working with LGC in delivering a Rapid DNA “Proof of Concept site over the period

April 2017 – December 2017. The “Proof of Concept” uses technology supplied under distribution rights

owned by Key Forensics. The technology is similar to that to be deployed via the Metropolitan Police Service

and may ultimately lend itself to a national buy to optimise lifecycle costs and availability of future features

and functionality.

Given underlying crime trends, it is reasonable to assume the trajectory of growth in Digital Forensics is likely

to outstrip the decline in demand for / spend on Traditional Forensic services. These factors, coupled with

any further level of outsourcing and the costs of accreditation, are likely to sustain or increase the overall

level of spending on external forensic services for the foreseeable future.

Global Digital Forensics Market

Rising cases of cybercrime and terrorist activities across the globe are the key factors driving the growth of

this market, evidenced in various free to view market commentaries.40

High rate of internet penetration and

increasing dependency on it for communication has gained the attention of criminals and hackers. Thus,

there has been a surge in internet-related crimes and misuse of government and corporate IT assets costing

huge losses. This is turn generates a specific need for Digital Forensic tools for gathering and examining

digital data, and for presenting it as evidence in a court of law. The digital forensics market is expected to

grow significantly over the coming years.

The global Digital Forensics market is typically segmented by five major domains:

computer forensics,

network forensics,

cloud forensics,

mobile device forensics

database forensics and others.

The global Digital Forensics market by end user industry is represented by seven segments: law

enforcement, healthcare, education, banking, financial services and insurance, information technology,

transportation and logistics, defence and aerospace. The law enforcement segment contributes the largest

market share. Moreover, terrorism and security threats are prevented on the basis of digital traces, thus

digital forensics is becoming a vital tool for defence and law enforcement.

Market Forecasts indicate this is a c. USD $2bn market potentially growing to over USD $3bn by 2020, with a

Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 11% -12% year on year, dominated by the North America region

contributing around 50% of the total market.

The most notable solution developers in the global Digital Forensics market, consistently identified in

published reports are Access Data, Guidance Software, Oxygen Forensics, FireEye, Paraben, Nuix, MSAB,

40

Various market commentaries referred to …..

http://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/digital-forensics-market-230663168.html

http://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/digital-forensics-market.html

http://www.insightpharmareports.com/Affiliated-Reports/IndustryArc/Digital-Forensics-Market/

http://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/digital-forensics-market-230663168.html

http://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/digital-forensics-market.html

http://www.insightpharmareports.com/Affiliated-Reports/IndustryArc/Digital-Forensics-Market/

OFFICIAL


Cellebrite, Digital Detective Group, LogRhythm, Binary Intelligence, Asr Data, Lancope. Most of these are

none UK centric but some do have a global / regional presence in the UK and Europe.

In the UK there appears to be a growing competitive market of organisations providing Digital Forensic

services amongst a suite of offerings focused on Information Assurance more generally. The Forensic and

Policing Services Association (FAPSA) 41

has many of these organisations, a mixture of SME’s and more

established / broader based companies, amongst its membership. However, many of these companies may

currently lack accreditation credentials or sufficient conviction in plans to obtain them.

The Forensics Expo 2017 42

to be held in London Olympia places a significant emphasis on Digital

Forensics, albeit much of it product rather than service focused. The breadth of companies exhibiting

indicates a wide range of technology / innovation which may need to be given a platform / route to market

other than by simply working behind the established forensic suppliers to Police Forces or waiting for

successor procurements.

The Government Digital Marketplace 43

may provide another Force neutral route to facilitate wider market

creation in Digital Forensic services in the future. Proactive use of this channel, driven via the Forensic

Marketplace Strategy Group may provide ready access to additional services, specified to agreed standards

/ accreditation levels. This marketplace would operate alongside and / or within existing non-exclusive

Force contracts, thereby keeping open access to innovation, through regular refresh of the Marketplace

itself, and sustaining a level of competition as the demand for digital forensic services develops in both

volume and capability terms.

In Digital Forensics, law enforcement is competing in a much wider industry pool for talent, demand,

resources and innovation etc. than the traditional Forensics marketplace. There are competing demands

arising from the limited pool of qualified resources and pace of technological change. These factors need to

be considered by the Forensics Marketplace Strategy Group when framing the future relationship with the

market, and in assessing the ability of internal Police resources to keep pace with both demand and

innovation.

Forensic Science Regulator

The Forensic Science Regulator was established in 2007 to advise Government and the CJS on quality

standards in the provision of forensic science. The Regulator ensures that forensic science services across

the CJS in England and Wales are provided within an appropriate regime of quality standards. Scotland and

Northern Ireland have their own CJSs but follow the Forensic Science Regulator’s standards. The Forensic

Science Regulator published her first Annual Report in December 2015.

The 2016 Annual Report44

, published in January 2017, raises a red flag around funding of science and

Force application of standards, reinforcing the following key concern …

“In this, my second annual report, I have updated my assessment of risks to quality in the CJS, reported on

progress against last year’s priority areas and defined priorities going forwards.

A year on, it is clear that the single biggest challenge to achieving my aim is financial: the costs associated

with complying with and being assessed against the standards.

To be clear, the standards are not some unachievable ‘gold-plated’ ideal; they are the minimum standards

expected of any reliable forensic science organisation, drawing from general good scientific practice and also

learning from errors and omissions of the past and of other industries.”

41

FAPSA website link http://www.fapsa.org.uk/ 42

https://www.forensicseuropeexpo.com/ 43

https://www.digitalmarketplace.service.gov.uk/g-cloud/search?q=Digital+Forensics 44

Forensic Science Regulator Annual Report 2016

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/581653/FSR_Annual_Report_

v1.0.pdf

http://www.fapsa.org.uk/

https://www.forensicseuropeexpo.com/


https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/581653/FSR_Annual_Report_v1.0.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/581653/FSR_Annual_Report_v1.0.pdf

OFFICIAL


The Forensic Science Strategy reinforces the importance of a robust quality regime.

“Operating within a robust quality framework provides the CJS with an assurance of the legitimacy of the

evidence being submitted. Complying with international standards, such as ISO1702511, provides a

framework that assesses competence, quality and effectiveness in meeting customer requirements.

Accreditation to these standards by an independent body demonstrates that the processes within which

evidence has been obtained and analysed have been independently assessed to ensure appropriate

validation of the methods used and competency of the staff who conduct the analysis.”

Key relevant standards

a. ISO 17025 (General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories)

b. ISO 17020 (Scene of crime)

Consistent quality across an organisation enables more cost-efficient operations. The absence or failure of

quality management systems could lead to massive costs from investigating and correcting miscarriages of

justice.

The Forensic Science Regulator has published the Codes of Practice and Conduct which provide additional

guidance, context and interpretation of the standards for the UK. Accreditation of forensic science is carried

out by the UK Accreditation Service (UKAS). This process of independent assessment provides an

accountable and transparent process that strengthens public trust.

ISO17025 is the international standard used to confirm the competence of a laboratory. It specifies the

general requirements for testing and allows laboratories to develop management systems for quality,

administrative and technical operations.

Under previous commercial arrangements, all commercial FSPs delivering services under the NFFNG are

required to be accredited to ISO17025 standards for each of the services they provide. However, this

requirement for accreditation does not apply to services purchased outside of the framework, such as digital

forensics or services purchased by the defence.

Police forces which carry out in-house forensic provision have agreed a timetable with the Forensic Science

Regulator within which they will obtain accreditation to the same standards as those required by external

providers.

Digital forensics is a growing and dynamic area but it is still possible to apply the same standards as for

other forensic science disciplines to achieve accreditation. The rapid pace of technological change and the

introduction of new devices mean that new methods are required in order to extract information. However,

the use of an overarching quality management system is still essential to ensure the validity of the methods

and the competence of the staff.

Other Spend Categories

Other potential spend categories to be considered but not dealt with in this paper include:

Forensic Archiving

Back office systems, e.g. Case Management, which may be outside direct scope of TF

R&D

Training and specialist resourcing / recruitment

OFFICIAL


APPENDIX D2


OFFICIAL


APPENDIX E – MANAGEMENT CASE

APPENDICES

APPENDIX E1 – SUMMARY TRANSITION PATH ASSOCIATED WITH OPTION 5

Virtually managed teams:Management, Enablement and Centres of Excellence (policy, QM, SMEs, marketplace)Services: Advisory, Accreditation

Fore

nsi

c P

roce

ssin

g se

rvic

es

PoC: TF Rapid Forensics

Year 0 (‘17) Year 1 (‘18) Year 2 (‘19) Year 3 (‘20) Year 4 (‘21) Year 5 (‘22) Year 6 (‘23) Year 7 (’24)

OBC FBC

Project: R&D

FP bureaux migration to central processing locations

Tactical changes to all FP bureaux

Migration of Facecapability from PND to single

building

Consolidation of Footwear

service delivery

Rollout of S/M/Tidentification

capability

Rollout of Patternidentification

capability

Migration of DNA

Rollout of strategic DNA

Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3

Biometrics Bureaux

Identity Resolution Bureaux

Identify delivery centres

Plan & Design

LLP & Fit

Migration 1

Traditional Forensics + ‘Digital’ Capability (Not DF!)

PoC: Met DF (legal entity)

PoC: DF T2 & T3 central processing across force

types

PlanMigrate from forensics

(DF T2-T3)Migrate from force / ROCUs

(DF T2-T3)

DF Central Processing

Industrialised central processingScene support services

Spe

cia

list

De

vel’

nt Set up R&D

capability

Set up training capability

Forw

ard

loca

tio

ns

Transition delivery of TF scene work (people) to new ‘service’

Logistics service development

PoC: Logistics

PoC: Frontline TF and DF across force types

Project: Investigator process impact

assessment

Roll out DF T1 self-service kiosks

Roll out single tasking system for Traditional Forensics scene work

Wave 1

Wave 2

Wave 3

Project:Plan &

common FP process

Project:Common

F/W process

Force R&Rs

IDENT1 decommissioned

PoC: Cross border tasking

Migrate others, e.g. NCA (DF T2-T3 )

Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3

Roll out TF Rapid Technology

Roll out of Digital Scene Capture Tech.

Building 1Building 2

Building 3

Logistics service rollout

Recruitment

Change programme team, including PMO

Migration 2 Migration 3

LLP & Fit

LLP & Fit

Transition into 1

building at a time

FY ’17/’18 FY ’18/’19 FY ’19/’20 FY ’20/’21 FY ’21/’22 FY ‘22/’23 FY ‘23/’24 FY ’24/’25

Tactical integration of work management systems

On boarding

Set up support services

Industrialised central processingScene support services

Set up cross-border

intelligence service

OFFICIAL


APPENDIX E2 – OPTION 5 INTERIM PROGRAMME TEAMS AND WORKSTREAMS

OFFICIAL


APPENDIX E3 – OPTION 5 BAU DELIVERY AREAS

OFFICIAL


OFFICIAL


GLOSSARY

The following acronyms are used throughout this outline business case to abbreviate key components. The

full description of these acronyms is below:

Acronym Defined

ACAS Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service

ADR Annual Data Return

APCC Association of Police and Crime Commissioners

BAU Business As Usual

BRP Benefits Realisation Plan

BTP British Transport Police

CAST Centre for Applied Science and Technology

CC Chief Constable

CEAC Comprehensive Estimate to Complete

CIPFA Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy

CJS Criminal Justice System

CLEP Collaborative Law Enforcement Programme

CPS Crown Prosecution Service

CSE Child Sexual Exploitation

CSI Crime Scene Investigator / Investigation

DII Digital Investigation and Intelligence

DNA Deoxyribonucleic acid

ERB Executive Review Board

FBC Full Business Case

FLC Forensic Leaders’ Conference

FMIT Forensic Management Information Tool

FMSG Forensic Marketplace Strategy Group

FSP Forensic Service Provider

FSR Forensic Science Regulator

FSS Forensic Science Service

OFFICIAL


FTE Full Time Equivalent

GMP Greater Manchester Police

HMIC Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary

HO Home Office

HOB Home Office Biometrics

HR Human Resources

ITIL Information Technology Infrastructure Library

MoD Ministry of Defence

MPS Metropolitan Police Service

MSC Model Service Contract

MSP Managing Successful Programmes

NAO National Audit Office

NCA National Crime Agency

NLED National Law Enforcement Data

NPCC National Police Chiefs' Council

NPV Net Present Value

OBC Outline Business Case

PCC Police and Crime Commissioner

PD Programme Director

PoC Proof of Concept

PRTF Police Reform and Transformation Fund

PSNI Police Service of Northern Ireland

PTF Police Transformation Funding

R&D Research and Development

ROI Return on Investment

SLA Service Level Agreement

SME Subject Matter Expert

SRO Senior Responsible Owner

TUPE Trade Union Protection of Employment