1. Laboratory Overview

  1. What type of forensic work does your laboratory primarily perform: seized drugs, toxicology, trace evidence, explosives, CBRNe, environmental forensics, or multiple disciplines?

  2. How many samples or cases do you process per month or per year?

  3. Are you a national laboratory, regional laboratory, police laboratory, customs laboratory, public health laboratory, or private forensic provider?

  4. Which agencies submit samples to you: police, customs, border control, prisons, drug consumption rooms, hospitals, prosecutors, or other laboratories?

  5. What is your current average turnaround time for a routine narcotics case?

  6. What types of cases create the largest backlog?

  7. Are you accredited under ISO/IEC 17025, working toward accreditation, or operating under another quality framework?

  8. Do you collaborate with other national or European laboratories on narcotics identification or emerging substances?

2. Instruments and Analytical Techniques

Core Question

What analytical instruments do you currently use for controlled-substance identification, confirmation and quantification?

Then ask specifically:

  1. Do you use GC-MS? Which manufacturer and model?

  2. Do you use LC-MS / LC-MS/MS / HPLC? Which manufacturer and model?

  3. Do you use FTIR? Which manufacturer and model?

  4. Do you use Raman spectroscopy? Benchtop, handheld, or both?

  5. Do you use NIR spectroscopy for screening or classification?

  6. Do you use UV-VIS, XRF, NMR, ion mobility, portable MS, or other techniques?

  7. Do police or customs teams use portable instruments before samples arrive at your laboratory?

  8. Which field devices are currently deployed, and who owns them?

  9. Which instruments generate the most useful data for identification?

  10. Which instruments are the most difficult to integrate or export data from?

  11. Are any instruments currently isolated on local computers or proprietary software?

  12. Do your instruments allow API access, automated export, network access, or only manual file export?

  13. What data formats are produced by each instrument: .spc, .jdx, .csv, .txt, vendor-specific formats, PDF reports, or database exports?

  14. Are raw spectra stored, or only final reports and analyst conclusions?

  15. Would you want field instrument results compared against laboratory-confirmed results inside one system?

3. Current LIMS, Databases and Software

Core Question

What Laboratory Information Management System or case management system do you currently use?

  1. What is the name and vendor of your current LIMS?

  2. Is your LIMS used for sample intake, chain of custody, instrument results, analyst review, report generation, invoicing, or all of these?

  3. Is the LIMS used across your entire laboratory, or only in certain departments?

  4. Does your LIMS contain raw analytical files, or only case metadata and final results?

  5. Does your LIMS have an API or integration interface?

  6. Can external platforms securely push or pull analytical data from your LIMS?

  7. Are you using any additional systems for police case management, evidence management, intelligence reporting, laboratory reports or early warning?

  8. Do field devices communicate with the LIMS, or are results manually transferred?

  9. Are results currently copied manually from instrument software into the LIMS or report template?

  10. How many separate software systems does an analyst typically use from sample receipt to final report?

  11. Where does duplication of data entry occur?

  12. Which part of your current software workflow causes the most frustration?

  13. Are you planning to replace or upgrade your LIMS within the next two to three years?

  14. Would Unknown Labs need to integrate with the existing LIMS, operate beside it, or replace part of its workflow?

4. Sample Intake, Case Management and Chain of Custody

  1. How are samples received and registered today?

  2. Is each sample linked to a case number, evidence number, barcode or QR code?

  3. Does your system track the sample from receipt through analysis, storage, reporting and court use?

  4. What information arrives with a sample: location, seizure date, agency, suspect information, visual description, presumptive test results, field device result?

  5. Are location and seizure metadata currently useful for trend analysis, or are they locked inside individual cases?

  6. How is chain of custody recorded?

  7. Would connecting field scans, laboratory confirmations and final reports raise chain-of-custody concerns?

  8. What audit trail would be required for a new analytical platform to be accepted?

  9. Who is legally permitted to access case-level data?

  10. Could anonymized analytical data be used for intelligence or early warning without compromising investigations?

5. Analytical Workflow and Identification

  1. Walk me through the process from receiving an unknown powder or tablet to issuing a confirmed result.

  2. Which method is usually used first for screening?

  3. Which method is required for confirmation?

  4. Which techniques are considered acceptable for definitive identification in your laboratory?

  5. Do you use validated analytical schemes aligned with SWGDRUG, ENFSI or national forensic procedures?

  6. How do analysts compare unknown substances against reference materials or library spectra?

  7. Do you use commercial reference libraries, internal libraries, national libraries or shared international libraries?

  8. How often do you encounter a substance that is not immediately found in your current library?

  9. What happens when a new psychoactive substance or unknown cutting agent appears?

  10. How long does it take to confirm and communicate a novel substance?

  11. Would it be useful to see similar spectra or confirmed cases from other authorised laboratories?

  12. Would you trust algorithm-supported matching if the analyst remains the final decision-maker?

  13. What level of confidence scoring, match explanation or supporting evidence would an analyst require?

  14. Would you want the platform to distinguish between screening results, presumptive results and laboratory-confirmed results?

ENFSI specifically identifies information exchange on new developments, shared drug-related MS libraries and quality assurance as important activities for forensic drug experts; this is directly relevant to Unknown Labs’ shared-data and early-warning value proposition.

6. Reports, Results and Court Requirements

  1. How are forensic reports currently generated?

  2. Are reports created through the LIMS, manually in Word/PDF, or from instrument software?

  3. What information must appear in an official forensic drug report?

  4. Do reports include analytical techniques used, spectra, chromatograms, reference standards, uncertainty, analyst signature or accreditation information?

  5. Who reviews and signs off results before release?

  6. Who receives the final report: police, prosecutors, customs, courts, public health agencies or intelligence units?

  7. Are report templates standardized nationally?

  8. Would automated report drafting be useful, provided the analyst validates and approves the report?

  9. Would you want a platform to attach spectra, instrument data, supporting files and analyst conclusions to the same case?

  10. What evidence would a digital platform need to preserve for a result to remain defensible in court?

  11. Does your laboratory need to export results into police, prosecution or judicial systems?

7. Emerging Substances and Early Warning

  1. How do you currently identify and communicate new or unusual narcotics?

  2. Who is notified when you confirm a dangerous or novel substance?

  3. Do you send information to national early-warning systems, public health agencies, EUDA, customs or police intelligence teams?

  4. How quickly does information currently move from confirmation to operational warning?

  5. What information can legally be shared immediately: chemical identity, spectrum, location, seizure context, concentration, adulterants, public warning?

  6. Would a live dashboard of confirmed substances, emerging clusters and geographic trends be operationally useful?

  7. Would automated alerts for repeated appearances of an unusual compound be valuable?

  8. What thresholds should trigger an alert: new substance, dangerous adulterant, geographic spread, increased concentration, repeated detection, unusual spectral cluster?

  9. Who should see early-warning information, and at what level of detail?

  10. Would anonymized inter-laboratory sharing be acceptable?

  11. Would you value receiving confirmed analytical updates from authorised laboratories in other regions or countries?

8. Data Ownership, Security and Sovereignty

  1. Where is your forensic data currently stored: local server, government cloud, private cloud, vendor cloud or external hosting provider?

  2. Are there legal or organisational restrictions on storing forensic data outside your country?

  3. Are there restrictions on storing data outside the EU?

  4. Does your organisation require EU-based or national data sovereignty?

  5. What types of data can never leave your internal network?

  6. Could anonymized spectral data be shared if all personal and case-sensitive information were removed?

  7. Who owns the raw spectra, derived results, reports and reference libraries?

  8. What user roles would be required: analyst, reviewer, manager, police officer, customs officer, public health agency, national administrator?

  9. What authentication or cybersecurity requirements would a new platform need to meet?

  10. Would deployment need to be cloud-based, on-premise, government cloud, or hybrid?

  11. What audit logs, access controls and data-retention rules are required?

  12. Would a European-hosted, Luxembourg-based analytical infrastructure be an advantage in your procurement or approval process?

9. Integration and Technical Requirements

  1. Which existing systems would a platform need to integrate with first?

  2. Which instrument would be the easiest starting point for a pilot integration?

  3. Can you provide sample exports from your instruments for technical compatibility testing?

  4. Are instrument computers connected to the internet or isolated for security reasons?

  5. Would data need to be pushed automatically from instruments, uploaded manually, or synchronised through a secure local connector?

  6. Do you require single sign-on, Active Directory, government authentication or role-based access?

  7. Do you have internal IT personnel able to support integration?

  8. Who approves software deployment inside the laboratory?

  9. Would your IT/security team require penetration testing, data protection review, architecture review or procurement approval?

  10. What is the minimum integration needed before the platform becomes useful?

10. Pain Points and Value Proposition

  1. What is the most time-consuming part of your current forensic workflow?

  2. Where do errors or delays most commonly occur?

  3. Are analysts spending time searching old cases or comparing data across disconnected systems?

  4. Are field results and confirmed laboratory results currently disconnected?

  5. Do you lack visibility across laboratories, regions or agencies?

  6. Are novel substances difficult to identify because reference libraries are incomplete or fragmented?

  7. Are reports delayed because results must be manually transferred between systems?

  8. What information do laboratory managers wish they could see in real time?

  9. What information do police, customs or government authorities request from you that is difficult to produce today?

  10. What would make you immediately interested in testing a new platform?

  11. What would make you reject it immediately?

  12. What would be a meaningful success metric: reduced turnaround time, faster identification, improved data sharing, fewer manual steps, faster early warnings, better reporting, or reduced backlog?

11. Pilot and Procurement Questions

  1. Would your laboratory be open to a technical demonstration using non-sensitive or historical data?

  2. Would you be able to provide anonymized spectra or test files from your instruments?

  3. Which substance category would be most valuable for a pilot: opioids, synthetic cannabinoids, cocaine adulterants, amphetamines, novel psychoactive substances, explosives or unknown powders?

  4. How many users would need access in an initial test?

  5. Would a pilot need to remain entirely outside live casework initially?

  6. What approvals would be required to run a pilot?

  7. Who are the decision-makers: laboratory director, scientific lead, IT department, ministry, police procurement, data protection officer or accreditation manager?

  8. Is there an existing procurement budget or innovation programme for laboratory digitalisation?

  9. What timeline would be realistic for evaluating a platform?

  10. Would a successful pilot potentially expand to police, customs, public health or national early-warning stakeholders?

Questions to Prioritise in a First 30-Minute Call

Do not ask all 127 questions at once. For a first conversation, these are the most important 20:

PriorityQuestionWhy You Need It1What type of forensic cases does your laboratory process, especially narcotics-related cases?Defines use case.2How many narcotics samples do you process per month or year?Quantifies scale and value.3What is your current turnaround time, and where do delays occur?Finds pain point.4Which instruments do you currently use for screening and confirmation?Identifies integration path.5Which manufacturers and models are deployed?Determines file/API compatibility.6Do you store raw spectra/chromatograms, or only reports?Determines available data.7What file formats do your instruments export?Determines technical feasibility.8What LIMS or case management system do you use?Determines integration requirement.9Does your LIMS have an API or integration capability?Determines deployment complexity.10How are instrument results transferred into your current system?Identifies manual workload.11How do you compare an unknown sample against reference data today?Positions solver/library value.12What happens when a new or unusual substance appears?Positions early-warning value.13How do laboratory-confirmed results reach police, customs or health authorities?Maps information flow.14Are field-device results linked to later laboratory confirmations?Positions field-to-lab connectivity.15Could anonymized analytical data be shared for early warning?Determines network potential.16Where must the data be hosted, and are EU data sovereignty requirements important?Positions Luxembourg/EU hosting.17What quality, audit-trail and validation requirements would a new platform need to satisfy?Establishes trust barriers.18What would make the platform useful enough to test?Identifies buying trigger.19Which instrument or workflow would be easiest for a pilot?Creates next step.20Who else would need to be involved in evaluating a pilot?Identifies decision chain.

Information You Need to Capture After Every Call

CategoryInformation to RecordLaboratoryName, country, department, type of organisationContactScientist name, role, decision-making influenceVolumeSamples/cases per month or yearMain Use CaseNarcotics, toxicology, customs, unknown substances, CBRNe, etc.InstrumentsTechnique, manufacturer, model, portable/benchtopData FormatsCSV, SPC, JCAMP, PDF, proprietary files, API availabilityLIMSVendor, version if known, API/integration statusWorkflow PainManual transfer, backlog, disconnected devices, reporting delay, poor intelligence visibilityReference DataExisting libraries, internal databases, national or shared systemsEarly WarningCurrent reporting route, sharing restrictions, need for alertsData RestrictionsHosting requirements, sovereignty, anonymisation, GDPR, case sensitivityComplianceISO/IEC 17025, audit trail, method validation, accreditation concernsPilot OpportunityInstrument/data available, approval route, stakeholder ownerCommercial ReadinessBudget, procurement path, evaluation timelineNext StepDemo, NDA, sample file export, IT meeting, pilot discussion