STATEMENT OF PURPOSE: This Model Policy for Quality Control and Assurance is provided to
assist field practitioners and other professionals in the determination of compliance
with established standards and best practices. Examiners should know and
adhere to all legal requirements and practice regulations in their local jurisdiction.
This Model Policy may serve as a point of reference for the development of quality
assurance practices and requirements for an agency or local jurisdiction. In case of
any conflict between this Model Policy and any local practice requirements the local
regulations should prevail. Examiners who work in jurisdictions and programs
without local regulations may refer to this Model Policy as a guide.
1.1 Quality Assurance (QA): Quality assurance activities are varied and can
include requirements for training, experience, continuing education,
professional certification, program accreditation and program evaluation
activities. Quality assurance activities can also include quality control
programs intended to ensure compliance and identify substandard
work products. Quality assurance for the purpose of this model policy
refers to activities related to the review of a single polygraph examination
for compliance with evidence-based field -practice standards and
best practices. Quality assurance reviews of this type can include self-review,
internal review by another examiner within the same agency, external
review by an independent examiner, or blind review in which
the reviewer is not informed of the examiner’s conclusion or other case
From the Board
- EXAMINER RESPONSIBILITIES
2.1 All polygraph examinations should be conducted in compliance with
applicable law, APA Standards of Practice and best practices.
2.2 Examiners should maintain all case materials, including referral information,
interview notes, test data, analysis, results, examination report
and audio/video recordings in a manner that is consistent with applicable
law, APA Standards, best practices, and agency policies. Where
differences exist, local statutes applicable to the polygraph will prevail.
2.3 Examiners should retain all examination materials and make all materials
available for quality assurance review, except where prohibited by
agency policy or statute.
- QUALITY ASSURANCE REVIEW
3.1 Reviewers should thoroughly review all examination materials including
written examination reports, recorded test data and audio/video
3.2 All quality assurance reviews should be conducted under an agreement
for confidentiality. Reviewers should remain aware that all examinations
materials and copies are the property of the original examiner
and should not be retained without permission.
3.3 Quality Assurance review, whether self-review, internal review, external
review or blind review, should document the review process and conclusions
in written form, including the following suggested items.
3.3.2 Examinee (optional):
3.3.3 Date of Examination:
3.3.4 Original Examiner:
3.3.5 Type of Polygraph (Diagnostic / Screening)
3.3.6 Detailed list of materials for review
From the Board
3.3.7 Review of the polygraph setting
3.3.8 Review of the pretest interview
3.3.9 Review of the question formulation
3.3.10 Review of the in-test data collection
3.3.11 Review of the test data analysis
3.4 A review of the pretest information to the examinee should include:
3.4.1 Examiner verified the identity of the examinee.
3.4.2 Examiner explains the instrumentation and process, including
that the examination can be terminated at any time, and obtained the
informed consent of the examinee.
3.4.3 The purpose of examination was explained.
3.4.4 The examination topics were adequately reviewed with the examinee.
3.4.5 Examination questions were fully reviewed with the examinee
prior to beginning the in-test recording phase.
3.5 A review of the examiner conduct during the pretest should include:
3.5.1 Interview conducted in a non-accusatory manner.
3.5.2 Target issues are thoroughly reviewed to assure examinee’s understanding.
3.5.3 Relevant questions are descriptive of the issue under investigation,
and not likely to cause confusion or uncertainty.
3.5.4 Development of comparison questions was consistent with the
type of comparison question utilized.
3.5.5 All questions were discussed and reviewed prior to the administration
of the test and were answerable with a yes or no or other instructed
From the Board
3.6 Collection of data and collection of charts should include:
3.6.1Examiner conducted an Acquaintance chart where applicable.
3.6.2 Examiner utilized a validated test format.
3.6.3 Recording sensors, including activity or movement sensor, are
3.6.4 Proper question pacing is observed and questions are correctly
marked with the start and stop location of each exact question that
was asked along with the examinee’s answer.
3.6.5 Effective placement and attachment of recording sensors is observed,
facilitating adequate data collection.
3.6.6 In-test chart annotations correctly indicate any instructions or
other events occurring during the recording of each question series.
3.6.7 Test stimuli questions are presented in a neutral manner.
3.7 A review of Test Data Analysis should include:
3.7.1Physiological data is of adequate quality for interpretation.
3.7.2 Examiner used a validated method for test data analysis.
3.7.3 Review examiners should avoid and or note any attempts to score
Unstable data, or data of artifacted or unusual quality.
3.7.4 Reviewing examiners should analyze the data using a validated
method for test data analysis, and should identify the analysis method
for the examiner and the review. The source of any discrepancies with
the analysis and conclusion of the examiner should be described.
- REVIEWING EXAMINER’S REPORT
4.1 Reviewers should be objective and factual in determining compliance
and non-compliance with published standards of practice.
4.2 Reviewers should avoid any discussion or inference about the exam From
the Boardiner’s competency, which cannot be done from the review of a single
4.3 Reviewers should only report on issues of compliance with local statutes,
APA Standards of Practice and other applicable guidelines.
4.4 Reviewers should not attempt to reverse the conclusion or offer a conclusion
in opposition to that of the examiner unless a gross error is identified
(original examiners have tended to be more accurate than blind
4.5 Reviewer opinions shall be expressed as:
4.5.1Examination is supported.
4.5.2 Examination is not supported.
4.5.3 Review cannot be completed without additional information.