Scientific Working Group on Bloodstain Pattern 

Analysis: Guidelines for Proficiency Testing in 

Bloodstain Pattern Analysis 

Scientific Working Group on Bloodstain Pattern Analysis (SWGSTAIN)

Objective | Introduction | Statement of Purpose | Definitions | Scope | Program Planning | 

Design | Evaluation | Documentation | Glossary | References 

Objective

This document provides guidelines for the establishment of a bloodstain pattern analysis 

(BPA) proficiency testing program within an agency. In addition, guidance is also provided 

for test development and evaluation. Proficiency testing is a component of a quality 

assurance program that is intended to assess the skills of a bloodstain pattern analyst, 

ensure competence in the area(s) tested is maintained, and ensure that the agency’s 

technical procedures are valid and fit for purpose. Undertaking proficiency testing may 

identify areas where improvements are required and where corrective actions may be 

appropriate. 

Proficiency testing must not be considered a replacement for training or continuing 

education. 

Introduction

The Scientific Working Group on Bloodstain Pattern Analysis (SWGSTAIN) comprises 

recognized bloodstain pattern analysis experts from North America, Europe, New Zealand, 

and Australia. The objective of SWGSTAIN is to serve as a professional forum in which BPA 

practitioners and practitioners from related fields discuss and evaluate methods, techniques, 

protocols, quality assurance, education, and research relating to BPA. SWGSTAIN’s ultimate 

goal is to use these professional exchanges to address substantive and operational issues 

within the field of BPA and to work to build consensus-based “best practice” guidelines for the 

enhancement of the discipline of BPA. 

1
Statement of Purpose

The purpose of this document is to provide a guide for proficiency testing. This document 

provides guidance to test developers and participants, taking into consideration such aspects 

as test format and design, test validation, test administration, and evaluation of results. 

Definitions

As used by SWGSTAIN, the following terms are meant to convey the meanings specified:

Must – Done without exception

Should – Expected to be done

Recommended – Appropriate, but not mandatory

1. Scope 

 

1.1 The intent of a proficiency test program is to evaluate an individual analyst’s

continued competency and adherence to one’s agency’s procedures. 

1.2 Only analysts who have been trained to competency should be proficiency

tested.

2. Program Planning

When establishing a proficiency test program, an agency should design a plan which 

details the components and extent of the program. The following should be taken 

into consideration.

2.1 Who is to be tested 

The agency should define who is to be tested and ensure testing is at an 

appropriate level for the function of the analyst. Factors to consider include 

but are not limited to:

- Accreditation standards

- Certification requirements

2
2.2 The knowledge, skills, and abilities to be tested

The proficiency test should reflect the knowledge, skills, and abilities 

necessary to fulfill the requirements of the analyst’s job in relation to BPA. 

These areas may include but are not limited to:

 - Pattern recognition

- Angle of impact determination

- Area of convergence and origin determination 

 - Clothing examination

 - Possible mechanism determination

 - Stain selection and sampling for biological analysis

 - Evidence integrity

 - Photography

 - Analysis and Reporting

- Chemical enhancement

- Presumptive testing

In addition to these areas, it is recommended the agency evaluate adherence 

to agency procedures relating to documentation, technical review, evidence 

handling, and related administrative actions. 

2.3 Test format

The agency should establish the format(s) of the proficiency tests to be 

administered. Types of administration formats include:

2.3.1 OPEN - In open testing, the bloodstain pattern analyst is aware they 

are being tested.

2.3.2 BLIND - In blind testing, the bloodstain pattern analyst is not aware 

they are being tested.

2.4 Test administration

2.4.1 The agency should take into consideration the proficiency test 

designer’s training, experience, and qualifications, the test design 

3
and complexity, and the relevance to the agency’s and analyst’s 

capabilities when choosing a proficiency test provider.

2.4.2 The agency should make every effort to avoid redundancy of the 

subject matter being tested in consecutive tests. 

2.4.3 The agency should ensure analysts apply established procedures 

while performing the analysis and independent conclusions are 

produced as appropriate to a test’s purposes. If the purpose of the 

test includes testing agency procedures, then technical review would 

be appropriate.

2.4.4 Consideration should be taken to establish the maximum time 

intervals between tests in which the analyst’s knowledge, skills, and 

abilities, as outlined in section 2.2, are tested. It is recommended 

proficiency testing be conducted on an annual basis for each 

qualified analyst. 

2.4.5 Proctoring of tests is not required.

3. Design

3.1 Test design – When designing a BPA proficiency test, the following should 

be considered:

3.1.1 A bloodstain pattern analyst should be involved in the design and 

construction of BPA proficiency tests. 

3.1.2 The proficiency test should mimic actual casework as closely as 

possible. Patterns should be created using mechanisms that are

encountered in casework. Factors to consider when designing the 

test include, but are not limited to:

- Predetermined scenario

- Stain pattern location and contextual information

4
3.1.3 Supporting information should be provided to the participant which 

includes but is not limited to:

- Scenario information

- Stain pattern location and contextual information

- Medical information

- Blood source information (e.g., DNA information)

- Source of the evidence item(s)

- Additional photographs

- Supplementary information (e.g., history of the item, 

police reports, and other statements)

3.1.4 The designer must document the proficiency test design and 

construction. 

 

3.2 Test Validation - The ability of a proficiency test to reliably assess the 

bloodstain pattern analyst’s performance must be validated prior to 

distribution. 

3.2.1 Proficiency tests offered by a commercial test provider should be 

validated by pre-distribution to three or more bloodstain pattern 

analysts, preferably from different agencies.

3.2.2 There is no requirement for third party validation of internal or 

interagency proficiency tests. Internal validation will be achieved 

through documentation of the construction and design of the test.

4. Evaluation

4.1 Results evaluation - The agency should identify a bloodstain pattern 

analyst(s), who is actively engaged in the field, to evaluate the proficiency 

test results. If an evaluator is not available within the agency, it is 

5
recommended an agreement is entered into with another agency for 

evaluation.

4.1.1 The evaluator(s) should take into consideration the following:

- The design and construction of the test

- The expected results as determined by the evaluator 

- The consensus results

- The expected results as supplied by the provider

4.1.2 If an inconsistency is identified then the evaluator(s) must determine 

the level of the inconsistency. The agency should have criteria in 

place for the categorization of the levels of inconsistency based on 

the inconsistency’s effect on the quality of the work product. 

An example of the levels of inconsistencies may be categorized as 

follows:

Class I The nature and cause of the inconsistency raises immediate concern 

regarding the quality of the agency’s work product (e.g., a bloodstain 

pattern misidentification).

Class II The inconsistency is due to a problem which may affect the quality of 

the work, but is not serious enough to cause immediate concern for 

the overall quality of the agency’s work product (e.g., one outlying 

angle of impact measurement from a group of measurements).

Class III The inconsistency is determined to have only minimal effect or 

significance, be unlikely to recur, is not systemic, and does not 

significantly affect the fundamental reliability of the agency’s work 

product (e.g., a clerical or administrative error).

 

The above classes have been adapted from The American Society 

of Crime Laboratory Directors Laboratory Accreditation Board 

(ASCLD/LAB) Proficiency Review Program, 2008.1

6
4.2 Test feedback

The agency should have in place a procedure which ensures the outcome of the 

proficiency test is conveyed to the participant and any other relevant individuals. 

4.3 Corrective action

The agency must have corrective action procedures in place that are appropriate for 

the levels of inconsistencies categorized above. For example: 

A Class I inconsistency may involve the removal of the analyst from casework, review 

of the analyst’s case files, and the successful completion of a competency test; 

A Class II inconsistency may involve remedial training; 

A Class III inconsistency may involve reiteration of the agency’s administrative 

procedures with the analyst.

5. Documentation

The agency must have procedures in place to retain all documentation related to the 

proficiency test. The retention period should be specified by the agency. 

6. Glossary

Agency - Any entity—such as an individual, a law enforcement department, a private 

company, or a government or private laboratory—that provides BPA as one of its 

functions.

Bloodstain pattern analyst – as defined through the Scientific Working Group on 

Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: Guidelines for the Minimum Educational and Training 

Requirements for Bloodstain Pattern Analysts

7
7. References 

1

The ASCLD/LAB Proficiency Review Program, 2008. http://www.ascldlab.org/documents/alpd1002.pdf (date accessed: 14 April 2010).

8