21 ISMOR 1 September 2004

Analytic Decision Support in a Civilian Organization:OPP&A in the CPA

David F. DavisGeorge Mason University

Ddavis@gmu.eduhttp://popp.gmu.edu

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 PlansThe QuestionsThe AnalysisThe Issues

The Plans

Military Campaign Plans Civilian Plans

Future of Iraq – DOS Late 2002Unified Mission Plan – CPA April 2003Initial Strategic Plan – CPA late summer 2003Transition Strategic Plan – CPA November 2003Mission Performance Plan – Embassy July 2004

OIF 1 – Coalition 2002/2003 – Coalition April 2003 – Coalition Nov. 2003Update – 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 PlanTowards Transition

Towards Transition

Security Economics 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 ClustersWorld Bank Sectors2207 CategoriesUSAID Primary SectorsThe 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

Democratic

Market Economy

Unified

Stable

Protected Freedoms

Pose No Threat

Self Defense

DemocraticPeaceTheory

Stability'Theory'

Free, Whole andSelf Protecting

Whole, SelfProtecting and

Sustainable

Topics from "Towards Transition in Iraq"Relationships by Analyst based on known or accepted concepts28 Feb 04 - DFD

The GoalThe ultimate goal is a unified and stable, democratic Iraq thatprovides effective and representative government for the Iraqipeople; is underpinned by new and protected freedoms for allIraqis and a growing market economy; is able to defend itself butno longer poses a threat to its neighbors or international security.

Goal Tree

Democratic

Market EconomyUnified

Stable

Protected Freedoms

Pose No Threat

Self Defense

ElectoralProcesses

StrategicCommunications

Plan

Public SafetyCounter

Insurgency

Judicial Systems

Electricity

Vital and Critical Elementsscored with Amber Status.

Tier I Ministries Only

Tree Update

Pose No Threat

Civil Order Social Justice

Public Safety

CounterInsurgency

Judicial Systems

ElectoralProcesses

Electricity

Societal Support

Transportation andDistribution

StrategicCommunications

Plan

Iraqi Media

Water and PublicWorks

Refugees and IDPs

Human Rights

Risk Model Version 0.1Restricted to Plan Elements

12 March 2004

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

EconomicDevelopment

EliminateTerrorism

MPP High Level Goals

Political

Security Economic

The analysis was an attempt to show the relationship between the ‘plan’ and the $18.4B.

DGS

Democratization and the Rule of Law

EconomicDevelopment

EliminateTerrorism

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

DGS

Democratization and the Rule of Law

EconomicDevelopment

EliminateTerrorism

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

Security and Law Enforcement

Education, Refugees, Human Rights and Governance

Health

Water Resources and Sanitation

Transportation and Telecommunications

ElectricityOil

Justice, Public Safety Infrastructure and Civil Society

PMO Categories Impacting MPP Strategic Goals

DGS

Democratization and the Rule of Law

EconomicDevelopment

EliminateTerrorism

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

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

DGS

Democratization and the Rule of Law

EconomicDevelopment

EliminateTerrorism

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

Security and Law Enforcement

Education, Refugees, Human Rights and GovernanceHealth

Water Resources and Sanitation

Transportation and Telecommunications

ElectricityOil

Justice, Public Safety Infrastructure and Civil Society

Local Governance and Civic Action

Economic Recovery, Reform and Sustained Growth

Emergency

Education

Public Utilities and InfrastructurePorts and Airports

Health

661

31

752471

232

0

0

15

42

90

1.5

64

53 993Ongoing or CompletedMillion US$

0

USAID project money only, does not include program overhead and direct salariesPMO as of 14 June 2004, USAID as of 17 June 2004

DGS

Democratization and the Rule of Law

EconomicDevelopment

EliminateTerrorism

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

Security and Law Enforcement

Education, Refugees, Human Rights and GovernanceHealth

Water Resources and Sanitation

Transportation and Telecommunications

ElectricityOil

Justice, Public Safety Infrastructure and Civil Society

Local Governance and Civic Action

Economic Recovery, Reform and Sustained Growth

Emergency

Education

Public Utilities and InfrastructurePorts and Airports

Health

Ongoing or CompletedMillion 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

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

Public Buildingsand Other

Reconstruction

RegionalPrograms

EconomicReconstruction

Governance Humanitarian andHuman Services

Essential Services Security

Mill

ion

$

Non US Spent2207Option AOption B

GAO Sector Description

Review

Scoring:

Contribution of Projects to GoalsContribution of Projects to SectorsContribution of Goals to Mission

The ModelAllocate 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 i iiuwU

iu

ia

Ma

i

i

ii

1

0

S.T.

Where wi is the Weight of Sector i, ui is the utility of Sector i , ai is the distribution to Sector i, and fi is defined as a piece-wise linear function.

)(afu ii And

Sector A(1) A(N) X M(1) M(N) B

Public Buildings and Other Reconstruction 535 1831 0.5 0.000934579 0.0003858 0.293595679

Economic Reconstruction 651 1962 0.5 0.000768049 0.00038139 0.251716247

Governance 199 587 0.5 0.002512563 0.00128866 0.243556701

Regional Programs 1,230 3,027 0.5 0.000406504 0.00027824 0.157762938

Security 5,080 5,234 0.5 9.84252E-05 0.00324675 -15.99350649

Humanitarian and Human Services 2,045 8,745 0.5 0.000244499 7.4627E-05 0.34738806

Essential Services 7,801 33,873 0.5 6.40943E-05 1.9178E-05 0.35039506

A, in $

U

A(1) A(N)

X

1.0

U = M(1)*A

U = M(2)*A + B

Utility Functions – fi

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000

PublicBuildings andOtherReconstructionEconomicReconstruction

Governance

RegionalPrograms

Security

Humanitarianand HumanServices

EssentialServices

In Sector Utilities

($1000s)

Util

ities

(1.

0 M

axim

um)

Sector Weights

ESS, 0.203

Humanitarian, 0.121

Gov., 0.115

Econ. Rec., 0.079

Regional, 0.037

Public and other, 0.026

Security, 0.419

Alternative Comparisons

Base Option A Option BPublic Buildings and Other Reconstruction 0 100 100 677 677Regional Programs 0 1000 1000 523 523Economic Reconstruction 184 800 616 1624 1440Governance 451 1179 728 1087 636Humanitarian and Human Services 1052 1350 298 1561 509Essential Services 12304 9500 -2804 8549 -3755Security 4281 4343 62 4251 -30

Change from Base

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

Relative Scores

0.75

0.76

0.77

0.78

0.79

0.8

0.81

0.82

0.83

0.84

Base Option A Option B

The Issues

Culture of AnalysisIntent of the Office v. Background of the DirectorAsking questions for which answers are desired

Cornwallis X

Proposed Theme: Analysis for the Multi-National Inter-AgencyThe ‘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, Canada2: The Boyana Palace, Sofia, Bulgaria3: The Holiday Inn – Las Cruces, Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA

Professor D.F. Davis, Program ChairGeorge Mason University, MS3B13401 N. Fairfax Dr.Arlington, VA 22201, USA+1 (703) 993-1703 Voiceddavis@gmu.edu  Dr. Ted Woodcock, Co-Chair and EditorSchool of Public Policy4400 University Dr.Fairfax, VA 22030+1 (703) 993-2280 Voiceaerw@gmu.edu Mr. Karl BertscheDaimler-Benz/Dornier88039 Friedrichshafen, Germany+49(7545)89613 VoiceKarl.Bertsche@dornier.eads.net  Dr. Paul Chouinard Strategic Planning Operations Research Team101 Colonel Bye Dr.Ottawa, OntarioCanada, K1A OK2+1 (613) 992-4500 Voicechouinard.p1@forces.gc.ca  

Mr. S Anders ChristenssonNational Defence CollegeSE 117 93 StockholmSweden+46 70 628 9678 Voices.anders.christensson@fhs.mil.se  Dr. Reiner K. HuberBundeswehr UniversityD-85577 NeubibergGermany+49(089)6004-2206 Voicehuber@informatik.unibw-muenchen.de  Dr. George RoseGroup LeaderSupport to OperationsPCS Department Dstl Farnborough+44 1252 45 1825 Voicegrose@dstl.gov.uk  Mr. E.P. Visco3752 Capulet TraceSilver Spring, MD 20906+1 (301) 598-8048 [Voice/Fax]gvisco@bellatlantic.net Larry WentzGMU Center of Exellence in C3I+1 703-757-1250 Voice+1 703-757-1251 Faxlwentz@bellatlantic.net

Cornwallis Committee Members