Standard for Reporting 

Results from Friction 

Ridge Examinations

Friction Ridge Subcommittee

Physics/Pattern Scientific Area Committee

Organization of Scientific Area Committees (OSAC) for Forensic Science
ii

Standard for Reporting Results from Friction Ridge Examinations

OSAC Proposed Standard

Standard for Reporting Results from 

Friction Ridge Examinations

Prepared by

Friction Ridge Subcommittee

Organization of Scientific Area Committees (OSAC) for Forensic Science

Version: 1.0

June 2020

Disclaimer:

This document has been developed by the Friction Ridge Subcommittee of the Organization of 

Scientific Area Committees (OSAC) for Forensic Science through a consensus process and 

proposed for further development through a Standard Developing Organization (SDO). This 

document is being made available so that the forensic science community and interested parties 

can consider the recommendations of the OSAC pertaining to applicable forensic science 

practices. The document was developed with input from experts in a broad array of forensic 

science disciplines as well as scientific research, measurement science, statistics, law, and policy.

This document has not been published by a SDO. Its contents are subject to change during the 

standards development process. All stakeholder groups or individuals are strongly encouraged to 

submit comments on this proposed document during the open comment period administered by 

the Academy Standards Board (ASB). 
iii

Standard for Reporting Results from Friction Ridge Examinations

Table of Contents

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................1

2. Scope.............................................................................................................................1

3. Terms and Definitions..................................................................................................1

4. General Requirements.................................................................................................2

4.1. Administrative Information ......................................................................................2

4.2. Technical Information..............................................................................................3

4.3. Examination Conclusions.........................................................................................5

5. Appendix A: Change Log ............................................................................................7
1

Standard for Reporting Results from Friction Ridge Examinations

1. Introduction

1.1. This document has been developed with the objective of improving the quality and 

consistency of friction ridge examination practices.

1.2. FSP’s shall have a written policy detailing the requirements of friction ridge examination 

reports specific to their stakeholders’ needs. 

1.3. The information provided within a written report should be clearly articulated so that all 

stakeholders can understand what is being communicated. Often, those needs are 

standardized through FSP policy and procedure, and are subject to administrative and/or 

technical review. 

1.4. Other types of reporting results, such as verbal notification, preliminary results, or 

investigative leads, may be prepared and delivered by an FSP to suit the specific needs 

of their stakeholders. The requirements and recommendations outlined below represent 

what shall and should be included. 

1.5. In this document, the following verbal forms are used: “shall” indicates a requirement, 

“should” indicates a recommendation; “may” indicates permission; and “can” indicates a 

possibility or capability. 

2. Scope

2.1. This document prescribes the minimum requirements that shall be included in friction 

ridge examination reports.

2.2. This document does not include the requirements for supporting documentation of 

reported elements (e.g. case notes, custody documents, etc.), or testimony.

3. Terms and Definitions

For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.

3.1. Administrative Information: Records—such as evidence receipts, chain of custody, and 

submission forms (electronic or hard copy)—that do not constitute data or information 

resulting from examination work.

3.2. Administrative Review: An evaluation of a report and/or supporting documentation for 

consistency with laboratory policies and for editorial correctness. 

3.3. Amended Report: A report used to document any subsequent modifications, particularly 

those that affect or correct an original result or interpretation.

3.4. Customer: Client, authority, organization or person(s) requesting the forensic services.
2

Standard for Reporting Results from Friction Ridge Examinations

3.5. Forensic Service Provider: A forensic science entity or forensic science practitioner 

providing forensic science services.

3.6. Stakeholder (interested party): A person or organization that can affect, be affected by, 

or perceive itself to be affected by a decision or activity.

3.7. Supplemental Report: A report used to document additional work performed with 

subsequent reporting of results.

3.8. Technical Review: A qualified second party’s evaluation of reports, notes, data, and 

other documentation to ensure there is appropriate and sufficient support for the actions, 

results, conclusions, opinions, and interpretations.

3.9. Verification: Confirmation, through either re-examination or review of documented data 

by another examiner, that a conclusion or opinion conforms to specified requirements 

and is reproducible. NOTE: “Specified requirements” are the FSP’s policies and 

procedures relating to Analysis, Comparison, and Evaluation of friction ridge 

impressions.

4. General Requirements

4.1. Administrative Information

4.1.1. Administrative information that shall be included in the written report:

4.1.1.1. Title of report - specific to type of analysis being reported (e.g. Latent 

Print, Tenprint, Processing Examination Report). 

4.1.1.2. Reporting FSP and location.

4.1.1.3. Date of report.

4.1.1.4. Any other FSP that performed any portion of the examination (e.g. 

contracted laboratories).

4.1.1.5. Unique case identifier assigned by the FSP.

4.1.1.6. Unique identifier for submitted items (e.g. item number, evidence number, 

serial number).

4.1.1.7. Description of items relevant to the examination. Note: For non-original 

evidence (e.g. lifts, photographs, or digital images), a statement indicating 

the reported description of original item.

4.1.1.8. Name and unique identifier of exemplars used for comparison (e.g. Date 

of Birth, Universal Control Number, State Identification Number, local 

reference).
3

Standard for Reporting Results from Friction Ridge Examinations

4.1.1.9. Origin of any exemplar used (e.g. provided as an evidence item, obtained 

from archive, or obtained from digital repository).

4.1.1.10. Means of indicating the end of the report (e.g. signature or the word 

“END”).

4.1.1.11. Disposition and/or retention of evidence and exemplars (where 

applicable).

4.1.1.12. Pagination, including the total number of pages.

4.1.1.13. Name and signature of the author(s) of the report. (Note: Digital 

Signatures are acceptable where controlled).

4.1.1.14. Supplemental reports shall reference previously issued reports.

4.1.1.15. Amended reports shall be issued to customer without delay if technical or 

administrative inaccuracies are discovered after report has been released. 

When amended reports are issued, an accompanying statement describing 

the nature of the change must be included.

4.1.2. Recommendations for administrative information that should be included in the 

written report:

4.1.2.1. Any aliases or AKA’s of an individual shown on an exemplar. 

4.1.2.2. Glossary and definitions of specific technical terms utilized including any 

abbreviations used (e.g. this can be achieved as an appendix, provided 

resource, memo). 

4.1.2.3. Statement that additional materials are available upon request where 

applicable (e.g. case notes, images, standard operating procedures, quality 

manual, qualifications of the examiners, etc.).

4.1.2.4. Statement indicating the opinions and interpretations are accurate to the 

best of the author’s knowledge.

4.1.2.5. Statement indicating the opinions and interpretations are within the 

limitations of the current state and understanding of the science.

4.2. Technical Information

4.2.1. Technical information that shall be included in the written report (as applicable):
4

Standard for Reporting Results from Friction Ridge Examinations

4.2.1.1. Indication of methodologies used to perform the examination, unless 

formally (i.e. memorandum) previously communicated to stakeholders.

4.2.1.2. Any deviation from FSP approved examination methodologies, policy 

and/or procedure.

4.2.1.3. Assumptions and limitations of any methods or procedures utilized to 

produce the examination results.

4.2.1.4. Statement describing the latent print processing that was conducted.

4.2.1.5. Statement describing items submitted for examination that were not 

examined, where applicable (e.g. known exemplars, ridge detail not 

assessed for utility, evidence items not reviewed for presence of ridge 

detail, no comparisons conducted).

4.2.1.6. Statement describing that analysis was performed and all the resulting 

utility decisions of friction ridge impressions.

4.2.1.6.1. Any utility decisions which the FSP allows by policy, that were not 

considered during examination, shall be reported. For example, if 

considering database utility and the examiner has not considered 

utility for source conclusions, this must be reported.

4.2.1.7. Indication of all friction ridge impressions suitable for source conclusions 

(e.g. ridge detail annotations or latent designators).

4.2.1.8. Statement describing comparisons that were conducted.

4.2.1.9. Statement describing biometric database (ABIS) searches that were 

conducted, and which ABIS databases were searched (e.g. local, state, 

federal).

4.2.1.10. A summary of the search results for ABIS searches conducted. (Note: this 

is not intended to require or recommend the inclusion of all individual 

candidates generated as a result of a database search).

4.2.1.11. Statement concerning what designated ridge detail was not searched in 

ABIS databases and why (e.g. friction ridge impressions not suitable for 

database search, deferred examination).

4.2.1.12. Statement indicating unidentified friction ridge impression(s) that are 

retained in the unsolved latent or tenprint databases.

4.2.1.13. If the agency has a policy to report on utility decisions or ABIS candidate 

list results that are preliminary, or investigative leads only, that 
5

Standard for Reporting Results from Friction Ridge Examinations

information and limitations of the assessments must be clearly indicated 

within the report as well as the process to have preliminary results 

reviewed or verified.

4.2.2. Technical information that should be included in the written report include (as 

applicable):

4.2.2.1. List with description of each item or unique identifier, indicating friction 

ridge impressions not suitable for source conclusions, or no friction ridge 

impressions were detected by the reporting examiner.

4.2.2.2. Statement detailing that the presence of friction ridge detail on an item of 

evidence does not indicate the significance or time frame in which the 

print was deposited.

4.3. Examination Conclusions

4.3.1. Conclusions resulting from the examination of friction ridge impressions may be 

reported utilizing one of the three frameworks listed below:

4.3.1.1. Conclusions expressed as an expert opinion utilizing knowledge, training, 

and experience.

4.3.1.2. Conclusions expressed as an expert opinion utilizing quantitative support 

from a probabilistic model.

4.3.1.3. Conclusions derived directly from and entirely dependent upon a 

probabilistic model.

4.3.2. If reporting Source Conclusions under framework 4.3.1.1 or 4.3.1.2, a clear 

statement that the opinions and interpretations are based upon professional 

judgement of the examiner shall be included in the report. Any Source 

Conclusions based on information not directly related to, or resulting from 

observations, or facts directly related to the examination must be clearly 

communicated. 

4.3.3. The following information related to examination conclusions shall be included in 

the written report:

4.3.3.1. Name on exemplar used for the reported conclusion.

4.3.3.2. Only comparisons which have been conducted shall be reported (i.e. a 

comparison must be completed to render a Source Exclusion or Support 

for Different Source conclusion).
6

Standard for Reporting Results from Friction Ridge Examinations

4.3.3.3. All non-verified Source Identifications, Support for Same Source and 

Source Exclusions included in the written report shall be clearly 

delineated. The limitations of the assessments shall be clearly indicated, as 

shall the process to have the conclusions verified.

4.3.3.4. All non-association conclusions reached (i.e. Source Exclusions which 

have been verified and Support for Different Source conclusions).

4.3.3.5. Where an Inconclusive/Lacking Support conclusion is included, a 

statement detailing the reasons for this conclusion.

4.3.3.6. Statement indicating that limited comparisons were conducted or 

comparisons were deferred, where applicable.

4.3.3.7. Clear statement when the conclusion is based upon simultaneous 

impressions or aggregate of information (impressions that do not stand 

alone).

4.3.3.8. The definition and range of source conclusions used by the FSP in the 

body or as an annex/footnote to the written report, unless alternatively 

formally communicated to stakeholders by notification memorandum or 

website reference.

4.3.3.9. Statement when a reported conclusion was the result of a conflict 

resolution process or consensus review and FSP policy (e.g. FSP policy 

dictates the most conservative conclusion is reported out).

4.3.4. Information related to examination conclusions that should be included in the 

written report:

4.3.4.1. The anatomical origin including the specific finger, palm or toe compared 

(only for Source Identification and Support for Same Source conclusions).

4.3.4.2. Indication describing verification that has been performed.

4.3.4.3. Statement indicating that all evidence is available for inspection and 

review by an independent examiner upon request.

4.3.4.4. Amended reports should be issued if changes in technology or 

understanding of underlying scientific principals significantly change the 

magnitude of examination conclusions. When amended reports are issued, 

an accompanying statement describing the nature of the change should be 

included
7

Standard for Reporting Results from Friction Ridge Examinations

5. Appendix A: Change Log

Version Date Change

1.0 06/22/2020 Original Issue