ISO 17020:2012 Accreditation FAQ
1. What is ISO/IEC 17020:2012 accreditation?
We all know what “Certification” is in the fire investigation industry, but what is “Accreditation”? Certification deals with only the “competency” of the one certified individual. Accreditation deals with the management system, technical methods, and quality of the work of a fire investigation company (which includes the education and training of staff). In layman’s terms it means we brought in an outside company to certify that we have the highest quality fire investigation and forensic engineering company in the Northeast, and one of only three companies in the US, giving our clients a more complete and reliable investigation. It also means our process ensures we maintain the highest level of “education, training, and experience” and have a documented adherence to the "Scientific Method”; two of the prongs of the Daubert standard. Anyone can say they meet this, but we can prove it. Accreditation is the independent evaluation by an outside third-party of a conformity assessment body (such as inspection body or laboratory) against recognized standards (NFPA 921 & 1033 as well as a handful of ASTM standards) conveying formal demonstration of its impartiality and competence to carry out specific conformity assessment tasks (such as inspection and testing). Obtaining ISO 17020 accreditation in the areas of fire investigation and forensic engineering with a scope that lists NFPA 921, NFPA 1033, ASTM E678, ASTM E1188, ASTM E860, ASTM E1459, and ASTM E1492 involves several key steps: 1. Assessment of Current Practices: Our practices were assessed against the requirements of ISO 17020 and the specified standards (NFPA and ASTM) and any gaps in processes, documentation, competence, and resources were identified and addressed. 2. Developing Quality Management System (QMS): We developed a QMS ensuring compliance with ISO 17020 requirements and the specified standards; a process which included developing documented procedures, work instructions, forms, and records for all relevant aspects of fire investigation and forensic engineering activities. 3. Training and Competency: We developed processes and records to capture training levels and work task authorization for all employees, documenting appropriate training and demonstrating competency in their respective roles. This includes training on ISO 17020 requirements, NFPA guidelines, and ASTM standards, as well as practical training in investigative techniques, evidence collection, analysis, reporting and testifying. 4. Equipment and Facilities: We have the necessary equipment, facilities, and resources to conduct fire investigations and forensic engineering examinations effectively. This includes laboratory equipment, specialized (calibrated and/or verified) tools, reference materials, and secure storage facilities for evidence. 5. Document Control and Record-keeping: Document control procedures were implemented to manage the creation, approval, distribution, and revision of documents related to fire investigation and forensic engineering activities. Procedures, records of training, authorization, conformity to requirements, etc. are secure and maintained. 6. Internal Audits: Regular internal audits are conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the QMS and identify areas for improvement. 7. External Assessment and Accreditation: Once the QMS was established and operational, we brought in A2LA (American Association for Laboratory Accreditation) to assess and certify that we meet the standards. The assessment included a thorough evaluation of our processes, procedures, competency, and documentation against the requirements of ISO 17020:2012 and the specified NFPA and ASTM standards. Once A2LA determined Genesis Forensics met all the criteria, they awarded us ISO/IEC 17020:2012 accreditation with Certification 7086.01 for the specified scope. 8. Continuous Improvement: ISO accreditation is not a one-time achievement; it requires ongoing commitment to continuous improvement. We regularly review and update our QMS, conduct training and competency assessments, perform internal audits, and monitor performance metrics to ensure the continued quality and effectiveness of our fire investigation and forensic engineering services.
2. What does accreditation mean to our clients?
An ISO/IEC 17020:2012 accreditation provides clients of fire investigation and forensic engineering services with confidence in the quality, reliability, and credibility of the services they receive, ultimately contributing to more effective decision-making, risk management, and resolution of fire-related incidents and losses. The accreditation of fire investigation companies improves facilitation of accurate and timely investigations, efficiency of inspections and reduction of errors in the data collection and analysis process. Accreditation is a commitment to a system of standard procedures with aim of improving the quality and reliability of investigations. Our accreditation translates to the following tangible attributes: Assurance of Quality and Competence: Our accreditation demonstrates that as a fire investigation and forensic engineering agency Genesis Forensics has undergone a rigorous assessment by an independent accrediting body. This accreditation signifies that Genesis meets internationally recognized standards for competence, impartiality, and consistency in our services. Reliability of Findings: Our clients can have confidence in the reliability and integrity of the investigation findings and reports provided by Genesis Forensics as an ISO/IEC 17020:2012 accredited agency. The accreditation ensures that Genesis follows established procedures, utilizes appropriate methodologies, and employs qualified personnel to conduct thorough and accurate investigations. Admissibility in Legal Proceedings: Our accreditation enhances the admissibility of our investigation findings and reports in legal proceedings. Courts and regulatory authorities give greater weight to evidence and testimony provided by accredited agencies like Genesis Forensics, increasing the likelihood of successful outcomes for our clients involved in litigation or insurance claims. And lastly it means a commitment to continuous improvement: Genesis Forensics is committed to continuous improvement and adherence to best practices in fire investigation and forensic engineering. Clients can expect ongoing monitoring, evaluation, and enhancement of our processes, ensuring the continued delivery of high-quality services over time.
3. What does accreditation mean for Genesis Forensics?
For Genesis Forensics accreditation is the path to market differentiation. It sets us apart from non-accredited competitors. It demonstrates our commitment to quality and professionalism, which is a significant factor for clients when selecting the highest quality fire investigation and forensic engineering provider. Accreditation helps Genesis Forensics attract new clients and retain existing ones by offering assurance of high-quality services above and beyond the industry norm. The accreditation process involves ongoing monitoring and evaluation, ensuring that we remain up to date with industry developments, best practices, and regulatory requirements through a continuous improvement process. Because ISO/IEC 17020 accreditation is internationally recognized it facilitates collaboration and business opportunities across borders. Genesis Forensics can leverage its accreditation to pursue contracts and partnerships with clients and organizations worldwide, expanding its reach and market presence. Accreditation to ISO/IEC 17020 demonstrates Genesis Forensics' commitment to risk management and quality assurance. By adhering to established standards and procedures, the company can mitigate risks associated with errors, inconsistencies, or disputes in its investigation findings leading to investigations of the highest quality and reliability. Accreditation to ISO/IEC 17020 also validates our competence in conducting fire investigations and forensic engineering. It serves as external validation that the company's personnel, processes, and methodologies meet internationally recognized standards for quality and professionalism. This gives Genesis Forensics enhanced credibility and reputation within the industry. It provides assurance to clients, regulatory authorities, and other stakeholders that the company adheres to rigorous standards and operates with integrity and competence and increases the likelihood of Genesis Forensics' investigation findings and reports being accepted as credible and reliable evidence in legal proceedings. Courts, insurance companies, and regulatory bodies have greater trust in the findings of an accredited agency, enhancing the effectiveness of our services for our clients.
4. Why did Genesis Forensics go through the process of accreditation when it is not a standard in the industry?
We are in the business of breaking the mold of “doing what has always been done” because we strive for better. We want to push the industry and ourselves into a higher quality investigation output. In John F. Kennedy’s s famous speech made on September 12, 1962, he talked about doing the things that are hard in order to make the US stand out as the best: “…We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win…” In 2009 the forensic science industry called for universal accreditation in the NAS report (National Academy of Sciences, “Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward”) and a decade and a half later, in 2024, there are still only three fire investigation firms in the US with accreditation to ISO/IEC 17020 for inspection of fire scenes. Why? Because it is a difficult process and involves a lot of work. Because it involves acknowledging you can be better. The process of accreditation is challenging but it was one we were willing to accept, to push forward and do better. With our accreditation, Genesis Forensics stands out from competitors due to several key factors: Expertise and Accreditation: As the premier firm in New England with ISO/IEC 17020:2012 Accreditation for Forensic Inspection, our team comprises of highly skilled professionals specializing in fire investigation and forensic engineering. Our accreditation demonstrates our commitment to excellence and adherence to rigorous industry standards. Full-Service Approach: Unlike some competitors who may focus solely on fire investigation or forensic engineering, Genesis Forensics offers both as a comprehensive suite of services. From determining the origin and cause of fires to investigating explosions, product failures, and water losses, our multidisciplinary team provides thorough and integrated solutions to our clients' needs. Nationwide Reach: While based in Sutton, Massachusetts, Genesis Forensics has a proven track record of working with clients across the country. Our ability to efficiently deploy resources and expertise wherever they are needed ensures prompt and reliable service regardless of location. Commitment to Growth: With a goal to double the number of forensic engineers within the next year or two, Genesis Forensics is dedicated to expanding our team and capabilities. This commitment to growth reflects our ongoing investment in talent and infrastructure to better serve our clients and maintain our position as the leader in fire investigation and forensic engineering. Client-Centric Approach: At Genesis Forensics, we prioritize client satisfaction above all else. Our team takes the time to understand each client's unique needs and concerns, providing personalized attention and tailored solutions. By fostering strong relationships built on trust and transparency, we ensure that our clients receive the highest level of service and support throughout every stage of their engagement with us. Overall, Genesis Forensics offers unmatched expertise, accreditation, and a commitment to excellence that sets us apart from our competitors and makes us the premier choice for fire investigation and forensic engineering services.
5. What did it take to achieve accreditation?
Even as a small firm that was built on structure, process and consistency, the process to obtain accreditation was not easy. As a vision that began in the summer of 2022, we hired an outside consultant familiar with the accreditation process to help ensure a smooth path to success. Our Director of Operations, Susie Pratt, worked closely with the consultant for over a year and a half to properly refine our existing business and management structure, and formally develop a Quality Management System from the ground up. Once accreditation was obtained in January 2024, the work did not stop. With this privilege comes constant monitoring and improvement to ensure we maintain our focus on quality. As a young company with a drive for consistency, we believe the process was easier for us than it would be for a large company with existing structures. Change is inevitable and it will be imperative for all companies in the fire investigation field if they wish to deliver a better product. We had the right people working on the challenge to see it through the long haul to completion. For that the managing partners sincerely thank the dedication of Susie Pratt, James (Jim) Stewart and Chris Rees. We are successful because of you.
6. Will NFPA 1321 or accreditation in the fire investigation field be weaponized?
Yes, Genesis Forensics believes it will, for a short time. When NFPA 921 was introduced in 1992 it was used in the courts to weed out investigators who relied on “junk” science and “Ipse Dixit”. NFPA 921 represented a significant milestone in the standardization of fire investigation practices by providing guidelines and recommendations for conducting investigations. However, its adoption faced resistance and criticism from some quarters within the fire investigation community. Critics argued that NFPA 921 introduced a more scientific approach to fire investigation, which required additional training, resources, and expertise and therefore was costly. Today we understand that this approach helps lead to a more reliable and higher quality investigation. Some professionals were reluctant to embrace these changes, preferring traditional methods and practices that had been in use for decades. As the standard of NFPA 921 became widely recognized, courts began to rely on it as a reference for evaluating the reliability and credibility of fire investigation evidence. This led to debates over the admissibility of evidence and the qualifications of expert witnesses based on their adherence to NFPA 921 guidelines. This aspect of its use fizzled out as the industry more widely adopted NFPA 921 as the “Standard of Care” or “Gold Standard” for the industry. When NFPA 1033 was updated in 2009 to include 13 areas of specific knowledge, and refined again in 2014, to include a total of 16 specific areas of education for investigators, it was used to weed out investigators who testified outside of their “lane” of knowledge or field of expertise. In legal cases involving fire investigation, NFPA 1033 was cited as a way to assess the credibility and qualifications of expert witnesses who testified about the origin and cause of fires. Attorneys scrutinized the expert's credentials and experience to find holes in compliance with the knowledge requirement standards outlined in NFPA 1033. If an expert witness failed to meet the qualifications outlined in NFPA 1033 or demonstrated deficiencies in their training, education, or experience, their testimony and opinions were challenged or discredited in court. Attorneys argued that the expert's findings were not reliable or admissible due to their failure to meet the professional educational standards established by NFPA 1033. They challenged the expert's ability to testify on opinions for which they had no educational background. This fizzled out as industry trainings were updated to include the requisite knowledge and those unwilling to change or learn new skills left the field. We believe the new standard expected to be released this year, NFPA 1321, will be “weaponized” in the same manner. It will be used to weed out those companies that do not have a commitment to stronger reliability and higher quality. Accreditation to ISO 17020, which mirrors the requirements in NFPA 1321, could be used as a legal tool to gain advantage in disputes or litigation. For example, parties involved in legal proceedings could challenge the accreditation status of their opponents' experts' firm or evidence storage facility to undermine their credibility or admissibility in court. In the same way it happened in the past this “weaponization” only works until much of the industry also decides to adopt the higher standards through NFPA 1321 compliance and accreditation. History tells us that as more companies move to this higher standard, the remainder will have a choice to either adapt or leave the field. In the interim, we feel confident that we can assist our clients with the understanding of the importance of a strong quality management system. While we do not necessarily agree with the term “weaponization,” we are proud to be an early adopter and encourage our clients to choose how to apply our accreditation to their advantage.
7. The history of a call for universal accreditation in the fire investigation field
In the 1980s, the book of choice for this field was the “Fire Investigation Handbook” published by the U.S Department of Commerce National Bureau of Standards. The book was 200 pages and covered topics like witness interviews and accelerant testing. There was no mention of any “certification” or “accreditation”. In March of 1990 the Federal Emergency Management Agency and U.S. Fire Administration published a report titled “A View of Management in Fire Investigation Units”. This report went into detail on several city Fire Investigation Units (FIU) and the management structure. The document calls out the NFPA and IAAI as working toward “certification” for fire investigators. No mention of “accreditation” was found. In 1992 the first edition of NFPA 921 Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations was released. Courts began to look at the document and eventually labeled it as the “gold standard” for fire investigations. Certification from both the IAAI and NAFI is discussed, with no mention of “accreditation” In 2006 a group of investigators and scientists formed a review committee called the “Innocence Project”. This group authored a document looking at two Texas fires from 1986 and 1991. The document was titled “Report on the Peer Review of the Expert Testimony in the Cases of State of Texas v. Cameron Todd Willingham and State of Texas v. Ernest Ray Willis”. The report claimed that the two men were wrongly convicted. The review caused enough commotion that the Texas Forensic Science Commission hired their own expert (Craig L. Beyler) to review the cases. In 2009 the “Beyler” report A.K.A. “Analysis of the Fire Investigation Methods and Procedures Used in the Criminal Arson Cases Against Ernest Ray Willis and Cameron Todd Willingham” was produced. The report consists of an in-depth review of two arson cases from Texas, both of which are ultimately determined to be accidental instead. This review set the industry into a tailspin. This same year (2009) The National Academy of Sciences produced a document called “Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward” which called for major revisions to the industry of fire investigation. Among the changes we see the first mention of “accreditation”. Page 6 ends with these conclusion comments: “In short, the quality of forensic practice in most disciplines varies greatly because of the absence of adequate training and continuing education, rigorous mandatory certification and accreditation [emphasis added] programs, adherence to robust performance standards, and effective oversight. These shortcomings obviously pose a continuing and serious threat to the quality and credibility of forensic science practice." There are 173 mentions of accreditation in the document, but most are called laboratory accreditation. Little is written about accreditation for scene inspections. In 2014 a subcommittee of the “National Commission on Forensic Sciences” narrowly missed passing a policy entitled “Final Draft Policy Recommendation on Universal Accreditation”. The policy would have gone to the Attorney General for consideration, a level that would have laid the ground for requirements that all Forensic Science Service Providers (FSSPs) be accredited. In 2021 the OSAC Technical Guidance document “Strengthening Fire and Explosion Investigation in the United States: A Strategic Vision for Moving Forward” was released. In it calls for the accreditation of all Fire Investigation Units: "The field of fire and explosion investigation needs to move toward accreditation of all fire and explosion investigation units. In 2016, the OSAC Fire and Explosion Investigation Subcommittee proposed that NFPA develop a Standard on the Organization and Operation of Fire Investigation Units. That proposal was accepted, a technical committee was formed, and a proposed draft of the standard was submitted to NFPA (NFPA 1321). This standard should provide a foundation for accreditation of fire and explosion investigation units." This brings us to 2024 in which we are eagerly awaiting the release of NFPA 1321, Standard for Fire Investigation Units. While this standard is not expected to call for the accreditation of fire investigation units, we see no other way to show compliance with the standard than to become accredited by a third party. In fact the 2021 OSAC document has the following statement showing that they intend to push the requirement for accreditation: "In 2016, the Subcommittee proposed that NFPA develop a standard for the organization and operation of a fire investigation unit and developed a first draft of the standard. NFPA accepted this proposal in 2018, and an NFPA committee began its work in 2019. It is envisioned that the NFPA standard (NFPA 1321) will be suitable as the basis document for accreditation of fire investigation units. … Recommendation: Require accreditation of fire investigation units by third parties based on an applicable consensus standard." Accreditation requirement is coming…and Genesis Forensics is out in front!
8. How does the accrediting body determine the "Forensic Inspection" is appropriate for our industry?
As part of the accreditation process, we provided our accrediting body (A2LA) the list of industry standards to which we believe are relevant and important for providing the highest quality fire investigation and forensic engineering product. The list of Inspection Procedures in our Scope was then evaluated and confirmed by A2LA. Click here to view a copy.