Who we are. What we are doing.

About the National Association of Forensic Science Boards.

Our mission

The mission of the Association is to disseminate and exchange best practices, research, expertise, data, and lessons learned among state-level forensic science boards and commissions governing the forensic science community.  

Our vision

The National Association of Forensic Science Boards (NAFSB) is a grass-roots initiative to ensure that State-level forensic science boards are best positioned to benefit forensic science.  The NAFSB has been established with the goal of being a means for existing forensic science boards to disseminate and exchange best practices, research, expertise, data, and lessons learned.  Many states have forensic science boards, but the scope of their authorities and memberships varies considerably. The NAFSB provides a forum for these groups to communicate and share their different experiences and identify best practices that are most applicable to each state’s unique circumstances. The NAFSB can provide technical assistance and training for board members and staff and improve access to the latest forensic science research and evidence-based policy and practice. For states that are considering changes to the structure of their board or developing a new board, the NAFSB can provide information about what has and has not previously worked in regard to structures, memberships, stakeholder engagement, and outcomes. Such guidance will improve the relevance and effectiveness of boards to ensure that they support forensic science improvement and engage with forensic science leaders and stakeholders with a collaborative mindset. 

Our structure

NAFSB is a non-profit 501 (c)(3) corporation organized in the state of North Carolina. We are governed by a nine-member Executive Committee and our by-laws. The NAFSB is not a federal entity or national governing body.

Kermit Channell

President, NAFSB

Retired Executive Director Arkansas State Crime Lab

Jennifer Naugle

Vice President, NAFSB

Deputy Administrator, State of Wisconsin Department of Justice, Division of Forensic Sciences

Kerry Collins

Secretary, NAFSB

Undersecretary of Forensic Science, Massachusetts

Sarah Chu

Treasurer, NAFSB

Director of Policy and Reform, Perlmutter Center for Legal Justice at Cardozo Law

Stephen Butler

NAFSB Executive Committee

Crime Laboratory Manager, Arizona Department of Public Safety

Jill Dooley

NAFSB Executive Committee

Director, Office of Forensic Services, New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services

Lynn Garcia

NAFSB Executive Committee

General Counsel, Texas Forensic Science Commission

Daniel Katz

NAFSB Executive Committee

Director, Maryland Department of State Police Forensic Sciences Division 

Marna McLendon

NAFSB Executive Committee

Coordinator, Arizona Forensic Science Advisory Committee

Frequently asked questions

Q. Is the goal of the new NAFSB to somehow reconstitute the National Commission on Forensic Science or in some way create a national oversight board for forensic science lab?

A. No, the NAFSB is not a federal entity or a national governing body. The NAFSB supports the work of State-level boards and commissions by encouraging communication and sharing lessons learned. Each State has its own criminal justice system independent of the Federal government, and most crimes are adjudicated on the State or local level. It is vitally important that States have the information they need to support reliable forensic science. Many States have formed boards and commissions for this purpose, and the NAFSB works to improve and support the work of these grassroots initiatives while leveraging and encouraging communication across the groups.

Q. What is the history of the NAFSB?

A. For many years, advocates have emphasized forensic science reform at the national level, but these efforts have had limited impact. Meanwhile, State-level boards and commissions have quietly made enormous progress to improve the support for crime laboratories and policies and practices in forensic science. John Morgan—a former State legislator—and Marna McLendon—a former state prosecutor—have discussed the benefit of an association supporting State and local forensic improvement initiatives for many years.

This past year, John published his research on wrongful convictions in the Journal of Forensic Sciences. The data from that study prompted John and Marna to consider the idea of a national association to help the work of State boards and commissions. This was March of 2023. They both felt this might be useful and reached out to the existing forensic science boards and commissions and key crime lab leaders. There was a very immediate response – YES! At the 2023 conference of the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors (ASCLD), these leaders met for the first time and formed an NAFSB planning committee. The Texas Forensic Science Commission invited this new “group” to have a conference in November in Austin, TX.

Our planning group met monthly, with lots of communication exchanges in between. We wanted to make sure that the first conference was valuable for those engaged with boards and commissions, as well as for other crime lab directors and public policy colleagues who may wish to explore having boards or commissions in their state. We plan to learn from each other.

As for what our future holds, we are just taking this first step to incorporate as a nonprofit, and to come together and exchange ideas. We have formed an Executive Committee to oversee the NAFSB and staff the association. NAFSB leadership is exploring ways to sustain the association’s work in the long term.

No one on the planning group suggested that the NAFSB would be a stepping stone to a national commission with oversight responsibilities. That concept would contradict our mission to strengthen State-level forensic science improvement initiatives.

Q. What is the NAFSB mission?

A. The mission of the Association is to disseminate and exchange best practices, research, expertise, data, and lessons learned among state-level forensic science boards and governing the forensic science community.

Expanding on that statement, many states have forensic science boards and commissions, but the scope of their authorities and memberships varies considerably. The NAFSB provides a forum for these groups to communicate and share their experience to improve their effectiveness. The association can provide useful technical assistance and training for board members and staff and ensure they have access to the latest research related to forensic science and evidence-based policy and practice. For states that are considering changes to the structure of their board or developing a new board, the NAFSB can provide information about best practices, structures, memberships, stakeholder engagement, and outcome expectations. Such guidance will improve the relevance and effectiveness of boards to ensure that they support forensic science improvement and engage with forensic science leaders with a collaborative mindset.

Q. Is the Association planning on reaching out to individual state legislatures to advocate for oversight or governance of state forensic labs?

A. No. The outreach we have been conducting has been directed to established board and commissions, interested state forensic lab directors and leaders, and other stakeholders to include as many engaged attendees as possible in our conference and association. Members of the planning group were from states with boards and commissions, both regulatory and advisory. We want to hear from each other what structures work best and how commissions and boards conduct their business and who is included on their commissions and boards as well as subcommittees. Challenges and lessons learned will be discussed and explored. There are states that have formed task forces to consider some form of forensic science board or commission but have not as yet moved forward with legislative enactment. There are states that may want to consider a board or commission. NAFSB does not believe there is one model board or commission that would work for all states, but to the extent that state forensic lab leadership and policy makers want to explore that formation, association members are willing and open to exchanging information concerning what has worked well in other States.

The Association is not in a position to be an advocacy organization. Its members, however, are open to working with others upon request to share their experiences.

Q. Is NAFSB funded by any organization or government entity?

A. The NAFSB is not funded by any organization or governmental entity. We have are a non-profit 501 (c)(3) corporation in North Carolina. Our first conference was hosted by the Texas Forensic Science Commission in Austin, TX. We will consider what our future is, how we would like to evolve and if we have a revenue source through membership fees, how we might use that for this website and other means of sharing information.

Q. What is the ultimate vision of the NAFSB?

A. Colleagues from a variety of backgrounds have come together to create the NAFSB to share experiences with the goal of serving the forensic science community. We believe forensic science boards and commissions can be a positive influence if they have the opportunity to learn from each other and their stakeholders. Early on in our process, the Texas Forensic Science Commission offered to host a conference and this was planned fairly quickly for November, 2023 in Austin, Texas. It was seen as a way to bring us together to share and discuss our experiences. Part of that discussion will include where we want to go as an association and how we might evolve. Our conference and other activities include the participation of a variety of stakeholders and forensic science experts.

Q. What have been the successes in forensic science labs in state with a commission or board?

A. There is limited objective data on the impact of forensic science boards and commissions—that is a big reason why the NAFSB will be focused on that topic. Our conference included presentations from a number of scientists and staff of existing boards and commissions to address how they have been effective in supporting solid and reliable forensic science and assisting state forensic labs in achieving the highest level of reliability and quality assurance. Presentations also include discussions of the challenges and obstacles that can arise with such commissions and boards, and hopefully suggestions how to move forward. The experiences of the different state commissions and boards have been varied. We want to learn from each other and engage all the stakeholders (attorneys, judges, law enforcement, victim advocates, researchers, and others) to build relationships, trust and communication. The end goal – effective, reliable forensic science.

John Morgan

NAFSB Executive Director