Download
assessing the value of u s army international activities n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Assessing the Value of U.S. Army International Activities PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Assessing the Value of U.S. Army International Activities

Assessing the Value of U.S. Army International Activities

102 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Assessing the Value of U.S. Army International Activities

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Assessing the Value of U.S. Army International Activities 21 ISMOR Conference Jefferson P. Marquis August 31, 2004

  2. What Are Army International Activities? • Army International Activities (AIA) make up a subset of security cooperation or military engagement • They encompass all non-combat activities involving foreign military and government officials • They include Army staff talks, equipment sales and training, multinational exercises and materiel technical cooperation • Army conducts more international activities than other services • But does not get much credit from the rest of DoD for its AIA efforts

  3. Whence Comes AIA Guidance and Funding? OSD SC Guidance Funding: CTR, WIF, etc. DOS Guidance Funding: Title 22, Other Countries COCOM TSC Strategy Funding: TCA HQDA Guidance (AIAP) Funding: Title 10 DSCA Guidance Funding: FMS, FMF, IMET, etc. Army Service Component Commands ASA(ALT) Guidance Funding: Title 10 Conduct Activities Conduct Activities Foreign Militaries Army Functional Commands Provide Security Assistance Army Functional Commands

  4. Current AIA Assessment System OSD State OSD SCG Perform. Summary OSD SCG AIAP HQDA G-3 Combatant Commands DSCA Country Assessments MOEs TBD AIAP MOE Army Service Component Commands ASA(ALT) Army Functional Command Activities PBB Criteria IN-COUNTRY Events Army Functional Command Activities

  5. To meet Army, OSD, and (possibly) OMB metrics requirements To demonstrate how AIA contributes to Army and national security objectives To indicate which AIA operations must be changed to improve security cooperation outcomes To know the full range of AIA available to achieve Army and national goals To account for AIA personnel and funding, and suggest where AIA resources might be better employed To uncover barriers that hinder execution and success of AIA Why Is the Army Interested in AIA Assessment?

  6. Three Phases of AIA Assessment Project • Phase 1: Laying the conceptual foundation for AIAKSS (LAST YEAR) • Phase 2: • Building AIAKSS • Testing AIAKSS • Phase 3: Expanding and employing AIAKSS (NEXT YEAR?) (THIS YEAR)

  7. Phase One Products • Developed a set of AIA Goals – the “ENDS” • Developed categories to organize AIAs – the “WAYS” • Developed output and outcome indicators to show linkages between WAYS and ENDS • Designed a tool to collect data from AIA officials

  8. Bolster Assurance Promote Democracy Establish Relationships Improve Cooperation Promote Transformation Improve Interoperability Bolster Defense Capabilities Ensure Access AIA Ways AIA Ends Professional education & training Military exercises Military-to-Military exchanges Military-to-Military contacts International support / Treaty Compliance Standing forums Materiel transfer (FMS) &Tech training RDT & E programs

  9. Indicators Link WAYS to ENDS The Ends: (From AIAP, TAP, DPG, QDR, & NSS) Access Transform Inter- Operate Bolster Defense Capacities Democracy & Stability Assure Cooperation Establish Relations Education & Training The Ways: (From AIAP & TAP) Exercises Exchanges Indicators Mil-to-Mil contacts International support Forums FMS+tech training RDT&E programs

  10. Putting AIA Indicators in Context Way: Education and Training Socialization Criteria Exchange Criteria Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes End: Cooperation Number of Graduates Alumni Networks Classroom instruction, e.g., IMET Money & Manpower Indicators

  11. Measuring Effectiveness of AIA Is An Ongoing Process Do outcomes contribute to ends? Do inputs support activities? Do activities produce desired outputs? Do outputs produce desired outcomes? Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes Ends Indicators Indicators Measures of Effectiveness Measures of Performance 1. Has end been achieved? 2. If not, are we measuring the end correctly? 3. If so, what are the impediments to achieving the end?

  12. Phases of AIA Assessment Project • Phase 1: Laying the conceptual foundation for AIAKSS (LAST YEAR) • Phase 2: • Building AIAKSS • Testing AIAKSS • Phase 3: Expanding and employing AIAKSS (NEXT YEAR) (THIS YEAR)

  13. AIAKSS Data Collection has Three Parts • Part A – Background information on AIA • Program/Activity name, description, and regions/countries covered • Funding sources and value • Part B – Output and Outcome info for assessment • Select and rank AIA Goals and Ways • Select and substantiate Output and Outcome indicators • Part C – Challenges to Success • Report challenges that hinder success

  14. AIAKSS Will Provide Useful Data to Army Planners and Managers • AIAKSS will be accessible from around the world via the NIPRNET (later SIPRNET) • AIA data will be aggregated annually at the program and command levels and submitted to HQDA • Users will be able to search for specific AIA program descriptions, resources, associations, measures and challenges • AIAKSS will retain search parameters for future use and sharing, • present data in graphical and text formats, and • permit data to easily transferred to Word and PPT documents

  15. We Selected Three Diverse Cases To Test Assessment Approach and AIAKSS • National Guard State Partnership Program (NGB SPP) • Army Medical Department (AMEDD) • Army South (USARSO)

  16. We Tested Part B With NGB SPP Officials in MN, MD, KS #1 Way: Military Contacts Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes #1 End: Establish Relations Number of Contacts Est’d New Points of Contact Approx. 500K State Contacts Rank of Contacts Brought New Countries Into Professional Network

  17. Phases of AIA Assessment Project • Phase 1: Laying the conceptual foundation for AIAKSS (LAST YEAR) • Phase 2: • Building AIAKSS • Testing AIAKSS • Phase 3: Expanding and employing AIAKSS (NEXT YEAR) (THIS YEAR)

  18. We Hope to Use AIAKIS to Evaluate Army’s Progress in Multinational Force Compatibility • This study would address four central questions: • Is the appropriate mix of AIA being used to build MFC? • What are the obstacles to building MFC and what might be done to overcome them?   • Are the appropriate measures and data available to assess the effectiveness of AIA in building MFC? • What new kinds of measures might be used to assess MFC-related goals in the future? • The results of this study would enable HQDA G-3 • To improve its policy guidance to Army officials charged with executing MFC-related international activities and • To make recommendations to higher-level DoD officials concerning the allocation of AIA resources so that they can better promote MFC goals

  19. Current AIAKSS Capabilities Could Be Expanded AIAKSS Assessment Goals + AIA Categories Countries • Current Country Data: • Where AIA • programs operate • AIA goals and • Categories by • country Funding Programs Region and Countries Outputs Current AIAKSS ties funding to program • Possible Future Enhancements: • Link program assessments to • countries • Tie funding to countries Outcomes

  20. We Have Additional Issues to Resolve • Which AIA programs should be assessed? • Who should provide AIA program information? • At what level of aggregation should the data be provided? • How should measurement targets be set? • Who should have access to AIA information?

  21. BACK-UP SLIDES

  22. Selection Criteria for Indicators • Generally, we looked for indicators that would • Leverage existing data and performance measures • Reflect an activity’s strategic and political importance • Provide a connection to AIA goals • Specifically, we looked for • Output indicators that are immediate results of AIA • Usually products of EXCHANGES that improve U.S.-foreign country ties in the near-term, e.g., graduates, visits, meetings • Outcome indicators that are results or by-products of these exchanges • Usually derived from a SOCIALIZATION process involving changes in foreign perceptions about working together with the U.S. over the long-term, e.g., new capabilities, knowledge, relationships, standards

  23. NGB Test Case Is the Furthest Along NGB-IA Crystal City One SPP Coordinator per State Total SPP Coverage: 45 countries 39 states 3 territories (Puerto Rico, Guam, DC)

  24. Part A Data: Funding sources and value by “Activity” State GA KS MN TN MD UT TX NY Funding Sources CTR, MMF, TCA, Other TCA, CTR, IMET, JCTP TCA, MMF, Other TCA, MMF, WIF TCA, MMF, Other TCA, MMF, Other TCA, MMF, TX State TCA Total N/A N/A N/A 88k 525k 50k 500k 130k

  25. Chosen Output and Outcome Indicators for Establish Relations and Military Contacts Outputs Outcomes Number of Contacts with Target Country Contacts established institutional points of contact Contact prepared Host Nation for tactical peacekeeping ops Highest Rank of Contacts with Target Country Contacts drew foreign country into an existing formal or informal professional network

  26. BUILD DEFENSE RELATIONSHIPS THAT PROMOTE SPECIFIC U.S. INTERESTS Bolster Assurance Promote Democracy Establish Relationships Improve Cooperation DEVELOP ALLIED AND FRIENDLY MILITARY CAPABILITIES FOR SELF DEFENSE AND COALITION OPERATIONS Promote Transformation Improve Interoperability BolsterDefense Capabilities PROVIDE U.S. FORCES WITH PEACETIME AND CONTINGENCY ACCESS AND EN ROUTE INFRASTRUCTURE Ensure Access AIA Goals Are Embedded In OSD Security Cooperation Guidance

  27. AIA Activity Categories • Professional education & training • Militaryexercises • Military-to-Military exchanges • Military-to-Militarycontacts • International support / Treaty Compliance • Standing forums • Materiel transfer (FMS) &tech training • RDT&E programs