全球智库信息集成服务系统

• A standardized and effective acquisition-intelligence governance process is lacking, as is an accepted practice for developing IMD requirements and translating them into intelligence tasks.
• There appear to be too many stakeholders involved in the IMD task-development process, and their responsibilities are ill-defined.
• The IMD requirements identification and production development process comprises two distinct phases that vary by service.
• IMD requirements can generally be binned into three categories: long-term requirements generally associated with an acquisition program; ad hoc requirements that come from combatant commands and operational forces; and requirements that are identified in the annual plan review of IMD requirements.
• Guidance on PR introduction and processing is obsolete.
• Some COLISEUM fields could be automated to improve standardization of inputs and ensure better-quality tasking inputs, add precision to tasks, and facilitate movement of tasks between systems. These enhancements would thus improve the timeliness and quality of IMD products.

The Acquisition Intelligence Requirements Task Force (AIRTF) asked RAND Corporation researchers to examine the process for developing, validating, and tasking Intelligence Mission Data (IMD) requirements. In response, the authors prepared process maps depicting the current methods used to identify and manage IMD requirements and researched a set of process-improvement questions that arose from a continuous process improvement (CPI) meeting attended by IMD stakeholders.

The authors reviewed the handling of production requirements (PRs) resulting from a Life-Cycle Mission Data Plan (LMDP) against ad hoc requirements. Their analysis sought to validate the hypothesis that efficiencies could be gained by minimizing processing effort and backlog by combining requests.

The authors also pursued a theme of determining if efficiencies could be realized by gaining a better understanding of the business rules of the Community On-Line System for End Users and Managers (COLISEUM) and the Defense Intelligence Analysis Program, which determines who produces what in the intelligence community.

The researchers aimed to try to understand and correct persistent issues or at least provide workarounds for how LMDPs are processed through the IMD Management, Analysis, and Reporting System (IMARS). They also sought to confirm that intelligence personnel are managing and validating the IMARS system, its processes, and the input.

• Chapter One

  Introduction

• Chapter Two

  Current As-Is Processes

• Chapter Three

  Governance of Intelligence Mission Data Activities: Processes and Tools

• Chapter Four

  Observations, Suggestions, and Further Research