Analysis and ProductionInformation collected in the previous ste.docx
- 1. Analysis and Production Information collected in the previous steps will be analyzed, validated, and fused into intelligence in the analysis process to be included into finished intelligence products. Analysis is defined by the ODNI as “The process by which information is transformed into intelligence; a systematic examination of information to identify significant facts, make judgments, and draw conclusions.” (ODNI, 2013) This transformation occurs when All-Source Analysts use all the Single Source INTs to create a fused intelligence product. Single Source INT We learned about “Single Source INTs” in Module three and they are HUMINT, SIGINT, GEOINT, OSINT, and MASINT. They are referred to as single source because they are derived from a single type of INT. You may hear of a single source SIGINT analyst, who is an expert in signals intelligence collection, or a single source IMINT analyst, who is an expert in imagery intelligence collection. All-Source INT The All-Source Analyst is not an expert in collection of the single sources, but is instead an expert in a region or intelligence function (terrorism, counter-drug, crime, etc.) that is the consumer of the raw single source information from all INTs. Analysts receive incoming information, evaluate it, test it against other information and against their personal knowledge and expertise, produce an assessment of the current status of a particular area under analysis, and then forecast future trends or outcomes. The analyst also develops requirements for the collection of new information. (ODNI, 2013) The All-Source Analyst will learn through experience to validate information using multiple INTs to confirm information collected through a single source INT. For example, if information is collected from a HUMINT source, the All-Source Analyst will look for another HUMINT source to collaborate that information or possibly
- 2. validate the original HUMINT source through SIGINT sources. Validation Validation is important to also counter an adversary’s attempts to conduct deception; however, the well-organized adversary will release multiple pieces of information through various INTs to mislead All-Source Analysts. A good adversarial deception plan will not only allow deceptive pieces of information to be collected to attempt to fool our intelligence analysts, but will also play into an analyst’s bias. The common biases of an analyst are mirror imaging (thinking the adversary will act the same way Americans do), cry-wolf syndrome (conducting an action multiple times so that when the adversary truly intends to act, our analysts do not take it seriously), and mission-creep/new normal (an adversary slowly changes tactics so that our analysts do not suspect nefarious activities). It is important for All-Source Analysts to be confident in their assessments, but they should be wary of overconfidence Many think that the job of an intelligence analyst is to predict the future. In fact, many early analytical methods were referred to as “predictive intelligence.” However, no analyst can be 100% certain that they know what an adversary will do and therefore cannot predict the future. Analysts can “forecast” adversarial actions. This can be explained the same way a meteorologist prepares a “weather forecast” not a “weather prediction.” To forecast adversarial actions or threats, analysts will use estimative language. Our ODNI reading explains this language on page 51 and 52. Following the 9/11 attacks intelligence reform also changed the way analysts presented intelligence assessments. Prior to 9/11 the IC suffered from “circular reporting,” which is nothing short of plagiarism. Analysts would find another analyst’s products, copy/paste that product into their product, and provide the product to their decision or policy maker. If an analyst requires two sources that provide the same assessment to validate information and then choose two products, the original analytical piece and the
- 3. copy/pasted analytical piece, they did not truly have two sources. This led to inflated numbers of adversarial equipment, personnel, strengths, intentions, etc. Following 9/11, the ODNI created Intelligence Community Directive (ICD) 203 (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. to establish analytical standards. ICD 203 provided guidance that all analysts must quantify their assessments with a level of confidence. ICD 206 (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. was later published setting a standard of citing sources to put an end to intelligence plagiarism. All-Source intelligence production varies from organization to organization depending on the agency’s mission and who their customer is. Lower level tactical military or law enforcement products may include products that focus on individuals of interest, groups within the area of operations, analysis of the area’s terrain or other key elements, pattern analysis, event analysis, or other near term / localized Intelligence Requirements a tactical operation can take action on quickly. Higher level products become more strategic in nature and look at larger national or regional issues. These products typically focus on the long-term issues on which a national level diplomatic or large scale military unit will take action. The products can come in the form of presentations, written products, or in-depth studies. Two of the national level products that are produced by all members of the IC are the President’s Daily Brief (PDB) and a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE). · President’s Daily Brief (PDB): The President of the United States is the highest level consumer of intelligence. The PDB is the highest level intelligence briefing in the IC and is therefore scrutinized heavily before the President receives the brief. The top analysts from all the IC agencies can be selected to become a part of the PDB production and briefing. Topics for the PDB can be submitted to the PDB team for inclusion into the briefing; however, only a few issues make it to the PDB each day. The National Security Council staff will review the PDB
- 4. before it is briefed to check issues for accuracy, relevance, and priority. · National Intelligence Estimate (NIE): The NIE is the highest level written intelligence product that is typically requested on a nation-state threat, but can also be requested on various issues. The requestors of the NIE are high-level policy makers such as the National Security Council or Congress. Once requested a Terms of Reference (TOR) will be created to propose the necessary input and intelligence needed to create a NIE. Top level analysts from any IC agency that can respond to the TOR are selected to draft the NIE. Once drafted the Director of National Intelligence and the National Intelligence Board will review and approve the NIE for dissemination. Dissemination This is the last step and it involves getting the final intelligence product to the requestor that submitted the initial Request For Information (RFI) and those in the IC with the need to know through information sharing. Once received by the requestor or any other customer, the RFI may not be fully answered, need addional monitoring and analysis, or create additional RFIs. This will restart the intelligence process, therefore explaining why the process is an intelligence “cycle.” Evaluation Simply put, this informal step in the intelligence cycle evaluates the final product’s relevance and if in fact it fully addressed the RFI. Essentially, the evaluation is “feedback” that occurs between the requestor and producer to address if the requests needs are being met. Adjustments to the product, established deadlines, format of the final product, validation of sources, or any other need of the requestor should be addressed in the evaluation step soon after the final intelligence product is disseminated. For this activity you are required to use the steps of the Intelligence Cycle to demonstrate your understanding of the
- 5. Intelligence Process. The module learning outcome addressed in this activity is: · Apply the steps of the intelligence process to a specific scenario or Request For Information (FRI) (CO #2) Create a PowerPoint Presentation that uses the steps of the Intelligence Cycle to answer a customer driven Request For Information (RFI). Please review the following requirements for your slide presentation. Slide 1: Cover slide that includes the assignment information and the Intelligence Agency you have chosen to work for in this assignment. Slide 2 (RFI): Identify a group, organization, or individual to produce an RFI. You will need to do some initial research on your RFI topic to ensure there is information to answer your RFI. Choose your topic and write your RFI in the form of a question to be answered. For example: Have attacks from Boko Haram increased since pledging allegiance to ISIS? Your RFI should be only one question. Slide 3 (Planning and Direction): Create three Priority Intelligence Requirements (PIR). Each PIR should also ask only one question. For example: PIR 1: How many attacks did Boko Haram conduct annually before pledging allegiance to ISIS? PIR 2: How many attacks did Boko Haram conduct annually after pledging allegiance to ISIS? PIR 3: If the current attacks by Boko Haram are lower annually, have attacks been planned, but not executed? Slide 4 (Collection): Provide a collection plan indicating which intelligence disciplines you will task to collect the information needed to answer each PIR. For example: PIR HUMINT SIGINT MASINT GEOINT/IMINT
- 6. OSINT PIR 1 XX XX XX PIR 2 XX XX XX PIR 3 XX XX XX XX Slide 5 (Processing): Explain how you would use each INT that has a “XX” to answer each PIR. For example: PIR 1: HUMINT can be tasked to provide information on the number of attacks that have occurred in 2014 prior to Boko Haram pledging allegiance to ISIS. Slides 6 and as needed (Analysis and Production): Write a final intelligence product that answers the RFI. This may take one slide, but no more than three slides to create. Open Source (OSINT) will obviously be the primary source for factual information, but you should create “assignment only” intelligence for the other INTs to validate your assessments. For example: Executive Summary: Reporting indicates that Boko Haram attacks in Nigeria slightly increased following their pledge to ISIS. However, Boko Haram attacks significantly increased in Niger, Chad, and Cameroon following the group’s allegiance to
- 7. the Islamic State. OSINT reporting indicated that Boko Haram attacks increased by 5% in 2015 following joining ISIS. However, reporting also noted that Boko Haram conducted its first attack in Chad in 2015. HUMINT reports indicate that the amount of Boko Haram fighters has increased in Cameroon, which supports reported increased attacks of 37 events in Cameroon following their pledge to ISIS. This example is brief, but it demonstrates the final write up and cites a “HUMINT” report which does not actually exist. Final Slide (Sources): List the sources that you have researched on this slide. Also list any of the source information that you have created for the assignment. While you are allowed to create some of the intelligence you will use, you are still required to provide sources of your academic research for this assignment. In other words, you cannot create 100% of the intelligence, but must include some factual information on your RFI answer.