21 ISMOR 1 September 2004 Analytic Decision Support in a Civilian Organization:OPP&A in the CPA David F. Davis George Mason University

I’m really not representing any of these! POPP OED OPP&A IRMO/Planning

Our Logo from IRMO/Planning (I’ll use it from here on)

Decision Support The Plans The Questions The Analysis The Issues

The Plans Military Campaign PlansCivilian Plans Future of Iraq – DOS Late 2002 Unified Mission Plan – CPA April 2003 Initial Strategic Plan – CPA late summer 2003 Transition Strategic Plan – CPA November 2003 Mission Performance Plan – Embassy July 2004 OIF 1 – Coalition 2002/2003 – Coalition April 2003 – Coalition Nov Update – MNF-I July 2004 Initial planning appears to have been disconnected. Subsequent planning was more coordinated. MNF-I and late CPA/Embassy planning verged on collaboration.

The CPA Strategic Plan Towards Transition SecurityEconomics Essential Services Governance Strategic Communications Based, in part, on previous work done for other missions, the Strategic Plan began with the primary goal of CPA and refined each of the sub-goals, or sectors, into objectives – then key tasks – and finally sub-tasks. The sub-tasks were monitored on a weekly basis and progress was identified by the responsible – operational – organization.

A Look at the MPP Three overarching themes are addressed in the introduction to the MPP. Fighting Terror Building Democracy Reconstruction and Economic Development. These same three themes are put forth by Ambassador Negroponte quite frequently as: Political: Democratization and the Rule of Law Economic: Development and Reconstruction Security: Eliminating Terrorism and Providing Public Safety

Structure of the MPP Performance Goal Papers Strategic Goals Performance Goals Strategies Tactics Performance Indicators The structure of the MPP is similar to that of the Strategic Plan – it is a decomposition of goals to activities.

Performance Goal Papers I – Prevention and Response to Terrorism II – Regional Stability III – Weapons of Mass Destruction IV – Democracy and Human Rights V – Economic Prosperity and Security VI – Consular Affairs VII – Mission Security VIII – Mutual Understanding IX – Education and Health Services X – Humanitarian Response XI – Management and Organizational Excellence Although comprehensive, these Goal Papers do not track directly with the themes. Very generally, they map as follows: Political: IV, VIII Economic: V, IX, X Security: I, II, III With the core Embassy Operations accounting for VI, VII and XI.

Other Categorization Schemes UN Clusters World Bank Sectors 2207 Categories USAID Primary Sectors The Conceptual Model of Peace Operations Although very similar, the determination of what activity or project belongs to what category becomes very difficult to predetermine. Knowing this ‘mapping’ is essential as we try to understand how spending and resource allocation relates to the overall goals and priorities of the Mission.

The Questions The bottom line: Not enough! However, most of the questions revolved around priorities. Under CPA: - What are the risks to the Transition? - What should be the top five priorities for the Administrator? Under IRMO: - How should the $18.4B be allocated? - What should be measured?

The Analysis The bottom line: Not enough! However, most of the questions revolved around priorities. Under CPA: - What are the risks to the Transition? - What should be the top five priorities for the Administrator? Under IRMO: - How should the $18.4B be allocated? - What should be measure?

Identifying the risks to the transition required that we used the current Strategic Plan. If the Objectives of the Strategic Plan represent the requirements, then the Amber and Red Objectives should help us begin the analysis of Risk – Probability of Failure. The Risks

Goal Tree

Tree Update

The Model

Microsoft Belief Network

Microsoft Belief Network Evaluated

The Allocation How can we propose a reallocation of the $18.4B? This effort has consumed the Embassy, although it was never a major issue in the CPA. This dichotomy may well be the source of many books over the next several years. Beginning in early June, the IRMO Planning office began to look at this issue from a goals based perspective.

DGS Democratization and the Rule of Law Economic Development Eliminate Terrorism MPP High Level Goals Political SecurityEconomic The analysis was an attempt to show the relationship between the ‘plan’ and the $18.4B.

2 A Strong Reliable Regional Partner 1 Counter Terrorism 5 Sustainable Growth 9 Social, Environmental, Health and Education 10 Refugees and IDPs 4 A Democratic and Free Iraq 3 Complete and Verifiable Disarmament MPP Strategic Goals

Security and Law Enforcement Education, Refugees, Human Rights and Governance Health Water Resources and Sanitation Transportation and Telecommunications Electricity Oil Justice, Public Safety Infrastructure and Civil Society PMO Categories Impacting MPP Strategic Goals

USAID Sectors Impacting MPP Strategic Goals Local Governance and Civic Action Economic Recovery, Reform and Sustained Growth Emergency Education Public Utilities and Infrastructure Ports and Airports Health

Security and Law Enforcement Education, Refugees, Human Rights and Governance Health Water Resources and Sanitation Transportation and Telecommunications Electricity Oil Justice, Public Safety Infrastructure and Civil Society Local Governance and Civic Action Economic Recovery, Reform and Sustained Growth Emergency Education Public Utilities and Infrastructure Ports and Airports Health Ongoing or Completed Million US$ 0 USAID project money only, does not include program overhead and direct salaries PMO as of 14 June 2004, USAID as of 17 June 2004

Security and Law Enforcement Education, Refugees, Human Rights and Governance Health Water Resources and Sanitation Transportation and Telecommunications Electricity Oil Justice, Public Safety Infrastructure and Civil Society Local Governance and Civic Action Economic Recovery, Reform and Sustained Growth Emergency Education Public Utilities and Infrastructure Ports and Airports Health Ongoing or Completed Million US$ $3,162M $243.5M 13:1 USAID project money only, does not include program overhead and direct salaries

How should we be spending the money? If we are to be spending the money to further the goals of the Mission, then we should try to understand how each of the projects and activities contribute to those goals. This will require some innovative thought on the part of all stakeholders: US, International Partners and the Iraqis. The IRMO Planning approach to this problem uses both quantitative and qualitative techniques of Management Science and Operations Research. 1.Identify projects and activities within funding sectors by source of funding and primary agent (PCO, USAID, IC, Iraqi) 2.Score these projects, within sectors, on the project’s/activity’s contribution to the second level Goals of the COM. 3.Score the second level Goals on their contribution to the overall Mission. 4.Determine the combined scores for each alternative allocation strategy. The choice of allocation strategy will be made by the leadership, not the analyst.

Identify contribution of projects and activities to the sectors. The advocacy briefings indicated that in sector priority lists exist in almost every case. These priority lists and the contribution of the project to the mission goals could be used to provide for project scoring within sector. However, this initial effort is focused on determining an investment strategy, not individual sector spending plans. The scoring must represent the general utility expected of a project within a sector.

Alternative Allocations GAO Sector Description

Review Scoring: Contribution of Projects to Goals Contribution of Projects to Sectors Contribution of Goals to Mission

The Model Allocate resources to the sectors in order to maximize the total utility (effectiveness), subject to the requirement that the total resources do not exceed $M (currently set to $18.2m). Maximize S.T. Where w i is the Weight of Sector i, u i is the utility of Sector i, a i is the distribution to Sector i, and f i is defined as a piece-wise linear function. And

A, in $ U A(1) A(N) X 1.0 U = M(1)*A U = M(2)*A + B Utility Functions – f i

In Sector Utilities ($1000s) Utilities (1.0 Maximum)

Sector Weights

Alternative Comparisons Change from Base

The combination of effectiveness and importance allows for a calculation of the overall score. Relative Scores

The Issues Culture of Analysis Intent of the Office v. Background of the Director Asking questions for which answers are desired

Cornwallis X Proposed Theme: Analysis for the Multi-National Inter-Agency The ‘Multi-Agency.’ Location is being decided by the committee since the Pearson Peacekeeping Centre is no longer available for conferences in residence. 1: The Royal Military College in Kingston, Ontario, Canada 2: The Boyana Palace, Sofia, Bulgaria 3: The Holiday Inn – Las Cruces, Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA

Professor D.F. Davis, Program Chair George Mason University, MS3B N. Fairfax Dr. Arlington, VA 22201, USA +1 (703) Voice Dr. Ted Woodcock, Co-Chair and Editor School of Public Policy 4400 University Dr. Fairfax, VA (703) Voice Mr. Karl Bertsche Daimler-Benz/Dornier Friedrichshafen, Germany +49(7545)89613 Voice Dr. Paul Chouinard Strategic Planning Operations Research Team 101 Colonel Bye Dr. Ottawa, Ontario Canada, K1A OK2 +1 (613) Voice Mr. S Anders Christensson National Defence College SE Stockholm Sweden Voice Dr. Reiner K. Huber Bundeswehr University D Neubiberg Germany +49(089) Voice Dr. George Rose Group Leader Support to Operations PCS Department Dstl Farnborough Voice Mr. E.P. Visco 3752 Capulet Trace Silver Spring, MD (301) [Voice/Fax] Larry Wentz GMU Center of Exellence in C3I Voice Fax Cornwallis Committee Members