COLLECTION MANAGEMENT RESPONSES TO THE JEREMIAH REPORT (W/ATTACHMENT)

Created: 8/24/1998

OCR scan of the original document, errors are possible

C*5

Assistant Director of Central Intelligence

APPROVED FOP

IVMNngtOiV DC

48

MEMORANDUM FOR: National Intelligence Collection Board Members SUBJECT:

Collection Management Responses co the irerhiah Report

The Intelligence Community Principals will meet with the Dtjyuty Director of Central Intelligence {DDCD on8 to discuss actions underway to respond to recommendations of the Jeremiah Panel. As Assistant Director of Central intelligence for Collectionave been tasked to take certain actions in response to these recommendations in the area of collection management across the Community. ill be addressing these at the Intelligence Community Principals meeting. It is expected that the results of the Principals' meeting will serve as the basis for the DCI's report to the Congress on the Community's response to the Jeremiah Report.

I know that each of you has given careful attention to the jWemiah recommendations and that you have actions underway to improve collection management in response to those recommendations. In myant to address not only my own responsibilities and those of the Collection Board, but also to highlight the collection management actions and plans that each of your organizations has undertaken independently. This approach will give the DDCI an opportunity to see in one aggregated package the progress to date.

To prepare for the Principals' meeting,ill need

from you byugust asist of Jeremiah-related actions as you can provide. To the extent that you can, please provide byrief description of the issue, the response, status (finished, underway,nd the responsible official or organization. ill roll your responsesriefing for the Deputy Director of Central Intelligence for Community Management onugust. Of course,ill share the aggregate package with you. It is likely to provide grist for our future meetings.

Collection Management Responses to the Jeremiah

UeyJrt

I am reminded that, even before the Jeremiah Report, the dnairs of the Collection Committees and Collection Board met onpril and highlighted several areas of work that meet subsequent Jeremiah criteria. (See the NICB memo (attached)ubject: National Intelligence Collection Board (NICB) and DCI Collection committees Summit Results Major Points.) Many of the same collection issues also were raised at the subsequent NICB off-site Movement on any of the tasks identified will be worth including under the Jeremiah rubric.

I fully expect the Congress and the DCI to use this Reportenchmark of the Intelligence Community's response to the intelligence shortfalls identified in the Jeremiah Report. We will be measured frequently on our pursuit of the plans and activities that we have underway. We need to demonstrate that we have an agenda for action to improve collection management, and that we are moving aggressively to complete it.

Attachment

k. Alien

sgeaaw-"

Assistant Director of Central Intelligence for Collection

Washington,CS

18

FOR:

Director of Central Intelligence for Community Management

Intelligence Collection Board Oi'frsite Results

Executive Summary:

1 The Assistant Director of Central Intelligence for ColleWitJn (ADCI/C) and National Intelligence Collection Board (NICB) Principals met8 to discuss the newortfolio and the Collection Board's role.

| [Overall, the offsite provided an opportunity for ColleCTTCw Board Principals to air their concerns and to explore,omprehensive fashion, the range of issues facing the Intelligence Community in collection management. In particular, the offsite achieved three objectives, to include:

Endorsing the ADCI/C's portfolio;

Proposing ideas for near-term enhancements to collection management; and

measures to improve the Collection Board's operations, to include working more closeJLy with the National Intelligence Production Board (NIPB}.

The participants agreed that they needed to continue the dtwmJssion in order to develop more concrete approaches to the Community's complex collection management issues. The group did identify and task several critical follow-on actions and tasked:

oew Director of Central Intelligence Directive (DCID) for the NICB that will identify the Board's membership and responsibilities.

SUBJECT:

National intelligence Collection Board Offsite

Theo focus on identifying measures to help break down the security compartmentations that inhibit collaboration across collection disciplines.

The NICB, with the NIPB, to co-chair anworking group that will identify means to improve analyst training on collection systems.

NICB, with the NIPB, to co-chair another inter-agency working group that will assess the levels of current collection against Tier IA and Tier IB targets.

Discussion:

Q

Theaid out his new portfolio andssues he plans to address. He also stressed the key role which he envisions for the Collection Board. As Principals discussed the ADCI/Cs role and mission, several critical imperatives emerged to include the following;

a strategy to integrate collection capabilities across the Community.

ational intelligence requirements process.

Solicit improved guidance for balancing competing requirements.

Set more realistic customer expectations.

Optimize the allocation of scarce collection resources (both capabilities and funding) against national, military, and law enforcement missions,

Establish anderformance evaluation process to determine performance success and define needs and gaps for mid- and long-term investments.

Intelligence Collection Board Offsite

the NICB-outline the Board's roles and missions as well as its relationship to the Community's Collection Committees, the Production Board, and the National Intelligence Officers.

i

adequate resources for the Collection Board and the ADCI/C's staff.

Ensure that the activities of thend the NICB are balanced between short- and long-term issues.

In order to implement these critical imperatives, the NICB rx-nicipals agreed that the following obstacles must be addressed.

The budget process incentivizes unique intelligence discipline contributions over multi-discipline collaboration efforts.

Security firewalls fcompartmentation) inhibit cooperation.

Physical separation of the committees, coupled with the lack of common electronic connectivity inhibits collaboration.

The Collection Committees are inconsistent in their operations, which undermines inter-committee cooperation and collection synergy.

The Community wastes resources in deriving

information that already exists elsewhere in the Federal bureaucracy yet ia inaccessible to Intelligence Community analysts.

The Communityrocess for training intelligence analysts in multiple intelligence disciplines.

| IA/CL offered toollow-on session in September1. In addition to further discussion on collection issues, the NICB Principals will be briefed on several initiatives under way to address requirements tasking.

Intelligence Collection Board Offsite

Its

NIMA/Central imagery Tasking Office (CITO) also will brief the Board on the status of its initiative to synchronize and integrate intelligence collection requirements reviews. NIMA/CITO had offered to lead this effort at an earlier offsite of DCI Collection Committee Chairs.

Original document.

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA