Get documents about "OSD Readiness and Training CE2T2 Assessments
Document Sample
OSD Readiness and Training
T2 Assessment
JAEC Assessment Working Group
WJTSC 10-1
29 March 2010
This briefing is UNCLASSIFIED
OSD Readiness and Training Policy and Programs,
Joint Assessment and Enabling Capability (JAEC)
Ver: 25 Mar 2010
Agenda
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Setting the stage
– Contact list
– Introductions
– JAEC Director Thoughts on the T2 Assessment
– Ground rules
• Assessment goals and framework
• FY2010 T2 Assessment Q1 IPR – draft
• JAEC Assessment issues and projects
• Way ahead
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 2
JAEC Assessment Goals
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
(Briefed to the T2 SAG 16 Nov 2009)
• Provide top-down assessment of largest components of CE2T2
account
• Show effect of CE2T2 on supporting COCOM requirements, to
include Service training
• Correlate outcomes to resource inputs
– Reference key Program Budget Requests (PBRs)
• Highlight potential gaps requiring further analysis
• Enable best practice sharing
• Support strategic communications
– Information useful to trainers and non-trainers alike
Use information other organizations have or should collect
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 3
JAEC Director, Thoughts on the T2 Assessment -- Outline
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Assessment motivation
• Two audiences for JAEC assessments
• Two types of metrics
• Two uses for JAEC assessment results
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 4
Assessment Motivation
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• …the Department must continually assess how America’s
Armed Forces are evolving in relation to the wartime demands
of today and the expected character of future challenges.
(p. 10, QDR Report, Feb 2010)
• Force management risk: our ability to recruit, retain, train,
educate, and equip the All-Volunteer Force, and to sustain its
readiness and morale. This requires the Department to
examine its ability to provide trained and ready personnel in
the near term, midterm, and long term.
(p. 90, QDR Report, Feb 2010)
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 5
Two (Primary) Audiences for JAEC Assessments
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• T2 Community (internal audiences)
– DUSD(R) and Director, RTPP
– Commander, JWFC
– DJ7/VDJ7
– Staffs in the T2 Community
• Service, COCOM, and Joint staffs
• JWFC entities (JNTC, JKDDC)
• Strategic Communications (external audience)
– Congress
– Inter-governmental partners
Need T2 Assessments to be valuable for both audiences
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 6
Two Types of Metrics
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Metrics that “take our temperature”
– We monitor…
– We are happy with a static measure that meets our goal
• Metrics that explore decision opportunities
– If results are too aggregated then might need to look deeper
– Measurements that stagnate might have outlived their usefulness
– Perhaps motivated by a need to shed light on a particular problem
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 7
Two Uses for JAEC Assessment Results
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Alignment decisions by T2 Leadership
– Is T2 enabling achievement of departmental goals or strategic
guidance?
– Are adjustments needed?
• To show the value or progress of T2
– Strategic communication efforts
– As a means to establish or defend fiscal requests or changes
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 8
Ground Rules for this Working Group
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
1. Looking for open discussion at the AO level
2. Non-attribution, but JAEC will make notes of
comment sources in case we need to clarify
3. We do not plan to commit to changes during this
meeting, but will develop positions for later review
4. Moderator will watch the clock
For reference, “CE2T2 exercises” refers to
– Services: JNTC-accredited exercises
– COCOMs: exercises supported by T2 and/or CE2
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 9
FY10 Assessment Framework
Analysis Topic Metric
T2 1. JNTC-accredited unit 1. Percent of units deployed to combat operations that participated in JNTC-accredited
training prior to Service training prior to deploying
Strategy deployment
2. Irregular warfare / 2. Percent of Service units training in irregular warfare and stability operations (IW/SO) at
stability ops training appropriate JNTC-accredited Service exercises
2006 3. Intergovernmental 3A. Percent of CE2T2 training exercises that include participation by intergovernmental
QDR and multinational personnel (federal, state, and local)
military participation 3B. Percent of CE2T2 training exercises that include participation by multinational
military personnel
4. JKDDC support to 4A. Percent of COCOM joint mission essential tasks addressed by JKDDC courseware
JKDDC the combatant
commands 4B. Percent of High Interest Training Requirements (HITR*)-Related Joint Tasks
Addressed by JKDDC Courseware
5. M&S support to 5. Percent of CE2T2 training exercises using JLVC Federation components
training exercises
6. Training Environment 6A. Percent of CE2T2 training exercises using JTEN
support to training
6B. Percent of Service exercises using JNTC OPFOR
JNTC exercises
7. Service training to 7A. Percent of major Service pre-deployment exercises that incorporate HITR-related
support COCOM joint tasks
missions 7B. HITR–related joint tasks not trained at JNTC-accredited Service training exercises
7C. Review of joint tasks trained at JNTC-accredited Service training exercises that are
HITR-related
8. CE2 engagement 8A. Coverage of COCOM engagement objectives by CE2-supported exercises
(Pilot project using data
CE2 from CENTCOM, 8B. COCOM engagement objectives executed in CE2-supported exercises
NORTHCOM, and 8C. Level of success of CE2 exercises on engagement objectives
PACOM)
*HITR: High Interest Training Requirements, from JFCOM Joint Training Plan, Tab H 10
UNCLASSIFIED 10
Agenda
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Contact list and introductions
• Assessment goals and framework
FY2010 T2 Assessment Q1 IPR - draft
• JAEC Assessment issues and projects
• Way ahead
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 11
Metric 1: Percent of Units Deployed to Combat Operations that Participated in JNTC-accredited
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
Service Training Prior to Deploying
• Intent: Measure the contribution of JNTC-accredited Service programs to the training of units
prior to deployment.
• Performance target: By 2012, 80% of deployed combat units will participate in joint training at
JNTC-accredited programs. Based on the FY07 baseline of 70%, the target will increase 2% per
year to the final goal of 80% in FY12 The underlined word is
the key word, the item
• Data element [data source] being measured
– Units trained in JNTC-accredited Service exercises conducted in the quarters up to and including the
reporting quarter [Service spreadsheets]
– Units whose deployment date falls during the reporting quarter [Army, Navy, Marine Corps: Service
spreadsheets; Air Force: ACC schedule]
• Findings
– For 3 full years the aggregated goal has been met.
– Participation continues to improve for Active and Reserve Combat, CS, and CSS.
• Issues – separate slide
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 12
Active Duty - % of Units Receiving Training in JNTC-Accredited Programs
Prior to Deploying
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
100%
80% Annual target,
70% 72% 74% 76% applies to combat-
60%
coded units, all
Active duty Services combined
40%
Combat units
20%
0%
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 Q1
100%
Active
80% Combat
Active CS
60%
Active duty Combat, CS, and Active CSS
40%
CSS units (no targets set)
20%
0%
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 Q1
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 13
Active Duty, Combat Units, by Service
% Receiving Training in JNTC-Accredited Programs Prior to Deploying
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
Note: There are no performance targets for individual Services.
Army Navy
97% 98% 100% 100% 100%
100% 100%
78%
80% 71% 80%
60% 60%
No
40% 40%
deploy-
ments
20% 20% in Q1
0%
Active duty 0% 0%
Combat units FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 Q1 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 Q1
Air Force Marine Corps
100% 100%
77% 80%
80% 74% 80%
67% 67%
60% 60%
43%
38%
40% 40%
18%
20% 20%
0% 0%
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 Q1 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 Q1
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 14
Reserve Component
% Receiving Training in JNTC-Accredited Programs Prior to Arriving in Theater
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
100%
Reserve
80% Component
Reserve Combat
Component units. 60% Reserve
Includes units from Component
Army Reserve, 40% CS
Army National Reserve
Guard, and Marine 20% Component
Corps Reserve. CSS
0%
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 Q1
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 15
Issues related to Metric 1
Percent of Units Deployed to Combat Operations that Participated in JNTC-accredited Service
Training Prior to Deploying
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
Original purpose of the metric: to show the “reach of T2” in a population of
interest (deploying units)
• JAEC would like to make the metric more relevant to the CE2T2 community
– What decisions should be affected by this metric?
• The rate for CS and CSS is substantially lower than for combat-coded units
– Is this a concern? Or are CS/CSS forces getting the training they need, and it isn’t
showing up due to JAEC’s methodology of measuring by units?
– Should JAEC change the methodology for CS/CSS forces? Should we set different
goals for them?
• OSD Reserve Affairs is looking into metric as it relates to Reserve Component
(RC) units
– What are appropriate targets for RC units?
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 16
Metric 2: Percent of Service Units Training in Irregular Warfare and Stability Operations (IW/SO)
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
at Appropriate JNTC-Accredited Service Exercises
• Intent: Percent of Service units training in IW/SO at
major service training centers
• Performance targets: USA – 90%, USN – 60%, USAF –
75%, USMC – 90%
• Results
• Data element [data source]
– Units that trained in IW/SO [Service
spreadsheets]
• Findings
– In Q1, 112 units participated in 21
JNTC-Accredited Service exercises; all
112 units received IW/SO training
– Rate of IW/SO training exceeded
targets for every service
• Issues
– Content of IW/SO training
determined by Service
– Extent of training not addressed by
metric, JAEC is examining data on
tasks trained
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 17
Metric 3A: Percent of CE2T2 Training Exercises that Include Participation by Intergovernmental
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
Personnel (Federal, State, and Local)
• Intent: Measure the level of whole of government participation in CE2T2 exercises.
• Performance target: FY09 RTPP-Coordinated performance targets
• Data element [data source]
– Exercises that included other government agency participation (US federal, state, local) [Service spreadsheets
and JTIMS for COCOM data]
– Exercises [Service spreadsheets and JTIMS for COCOMs]
COCOM Service Aggregate
100%
•Findings COCOM Target Service Target Aggregate Target
90%
– In the aggregate, 80%
intergovernmental 70%
participation has been 60%
increasing 50%
– Participation of 40%
intergovernmental 30%
personnel exceeds the 20%
target for CE2T2-supported 10%
COCOM exercises 0%
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 Q1
•Issues – separate slide
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 18
Intergovernmental Participation Rate
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
100% 100%
80% Army 80%
60% 100% 60%
100% JFCOM
40% 80% AFRICOM 80% 40%
20% 60% 60% 20%
0% 40%
NORTHCOM 0%
40%
FY07 FY08 FY09 20% 20% FY07 FY08 FY09
0% 0%
100% FY09 FY09 FY07 FY08 FY09 100%
80% Navy 80%
60% 100% 60%
100% SOCOM
40% 80% CENTCOM 80% PACOM 40%
20% 60% 20%
60%
0% 40% 0%
40%
FY07 FY08 FY09 20% 20% FY07 FY08 FY09
0% 0%
100% FY07 FY08 FY09 FY07 FY08 FY09 100%
Marine Corps STRATCOM
80% 80%
60% 100% 60%
100%
40% 80% 40%
80%
20% 60% 20%
EUCOM 60%
0% 40% 0%
40% SOUTHCOM
FY07 FY08 FY09 20% 20% FY07 FY08 FY09
0% 0%
100% FY07 FY08 FY09 FY07 FY08 FY09 100%
TRANSCOM
80% Air Force 80%
60% 60%
40% 40%
20% 20%
0% Dashed line on each graph is FY09 target 0%
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY07 FY08 FY09
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 19
FY2009 VS FY2010 Intergovernmental Way-Ahead Discussion –
Reporting
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Guiding principles
– 2010 QDR report reaffirms leadership emphasis
– Primary interest in tracking intergovernmental participation is in the context of assuring
that DoD forces are appropriately trained
– Metric should include state and local government
– In order to count, participation should replicate the expected operating environment
– Role players / contractors / reach-back / other agency members of permanent staff
members
• JTIMS verification process
– JTIMS data is not reliable for assessment
– Some organizations have provided business rules: “Exercise A always includes
intergovernmental participation”
– But actual execution is what we’re measuring
– Rely on COCOM input to “verification spreadsheets”
– “Last chance” to get participation correct
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 20
FY2009 VS FY2010 Intergovernmental Way-Ahead Discussion –
Revising Targets
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• JAEC involvement is in support of RTPP policy lead Mr Frank DiGiovanni
• Reasons for considering new targets
– Lessons have been learned since FY09 goals were announced
– This metric could be useful to highlighting DoD and organizational strategic needs
• Considerations for revising the targets
– Primary driver remains “US military training audience needs,” but larger goals should be
taken into account (refer to QDR as well as your organization’s strategic needs)
– These are not mutually exclusive, just require adequate time for coordination
– We will consider requirement for each rotation, not just an exercise series
– Ensure we have the right counting rules (previous slide) and apply them
– Option to set different targets for each FY
– JAEC will track and brief requests for support, but we still need big picture requirement
goals
• Next steps
– Formal staffing with the T2 community, anticipating 3 weeks for initial reply
– RTPP will review your proposed goals and open a dialogue if necessary
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 21
Metric 3B: Percent of CE2T2 Training Exercises that Include Participation by Multinational
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
Military Personnel
• Intent: Measure the level of international military participation in CE2T2 exercises.
• Performance target: FY09 RTPP-Coordinated performance targets
• Data element [data source]
– Exercises that included international military participation [Service spreadsheets and JTIMS for COCOM data]
– Exercises [Service spreadsheets and JTIMS for COCOMs]
COCOM Service Aggregate
100%
COCOM Target Service Target Aggregate Target
•Findings 90%
– In the aggregate, 80%
international participation 70%
has been increasing 60%
50%
– Participation of
40%
multinational military
30%
personnel exceeds the
20%
target for CE2T2-supported
10%
COCOM exercises 0%
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 Q1
•Issues – separate slide
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 22
Multinational Military Participation Rate
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
100% 100% 100% 100%
80% Army AFRICOM
80%
80% 80%
60% 60% 60% 60% JFCOM
40% 40% 40% 40%
20% NORTHCOM 20%
20% 20%
0% 0% 0% 0%
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY07 FY08 FY09
FY09 FY09
100% 100%
80% Navy 80% SOCOM
60% 100% 100% 60%
40% 80% CENTCOM 80% 40%
20% 60% 60% 20%
0% 40% 40% 0%
PACOM
FY07 FY08 FY09 20% 20% FY07 FY08 FY09
0% 0%
100% FY07 FY08 FY09 FY07 FY08 FY09 100%
80% Marine Corps 80% STRATCOM
60% 60%
40% 40%
20% 100% 100% 20%
0% 80% 80% 0%
FY07 FY08 FY09 60% EUCOM 60% FY07 FY08 FY09
40% 40% SOUTHCOM
100% 20% 20% 100%
80% Air Force 0% 0% 80% TRANSCOM
60% FY07 FY08 FY09 FY07 FY08 FY09 60%
40% 40%
20% 20%
0% 0%
Dashed line on each graph is FY09 target
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY07 FY08 FY09
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 23
FY2009 VS FY2010 Multinational Military Way-Ahead Discussion –
Reporting
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Guiding principles
– 2010 QDR report reaffirms leadership emphasis
– Primary interest in tracking international military participation is in the context of
assuring that DoD forces are appropriately trained
– In order to count, participation should replicate the expected operating environment
– Foreign officers on permanent staff / role players / contractors / reach-back
• JTIMS Verification process
– JTIMS data is not reliable for JAEC assessment
– Some organizations have provided business rules: “Exercise A always includes
multinational military participation”
– But actual execution is what we’re measuring
– Rely on COCOM input to “verification spreadsheets”
– “Last chance” to get participation correct
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 24
FY2009 VS FY2010 Multinational Way-Ahead Discussion –
Revising Targets
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• JAEC involvement is in support of RTPP policy lead Mr Frank DiGiovanni
• Reasons for considering new goals
– Lessons have been learned since FY09 goals were announced
– This metric could be useful to highlighting DoD and organizational strategic needs
• Considerations for revising the targets
– Primary driver remains “US military training audience needs,” but larger goals should be
taken into account (refer to QDR as well as your organization’s strategic needs)
– These are not mutually exclusive, just require adequate time for coordination
– We will consider requirement for each rotation, not just an exercise series
– Ensure we have the right counting rules (previous slide) and apply them
– Option to set different targets for each FY
– JAEC will track and brief requests, but we still need big picture requirement goals
• Next steps
– Formal staffing with T2 community, anticipating 3 weeks for initial reply
– RTPP will review your proposed goals and open a dialogue if necessary
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 25
Metric 4A: Percent of COCOM Joint Mission Essential Tasks Addressed by JKDDC Courseware
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Intent: Measure the fulfillment of COCOM requirements for individual training by the JKDDC program
• Performance target: None.
• Data elements [data source]
– COCOM joint mission essential tasks addressed by JKDDC courseware [JKDDC]
– COCOM command joint mission essential tasks [DRRS]
• Findings
– Coverage varies by COCOM
– Coverage increase for “other” JMETs is the result of elimination of many uncovered tasks
from COCOM JMETLs
• Issue
– There is no performance target
100% Command JMETS Other JMETs Total JMETs
100%
80%
80%
60%
Command JMETs 60%
40%
Other JMETs
20% 40%
Total JMETS
0% 20%
0%
FY09 FY10 Q1
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 26
Metric 4B: Percent of HITR-related Joint Tasks Addressed by JKDDC Courseware
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Intent: Identify possible opportunities for improved HITI training capability in JKDDC courses
• Performance target: Implicitly 100% because these tasks have been identified as
requirements that should be better trained
• Data elements [data source]
– HITR-related joint tasks addressed by JKDDC courseware [JKDDC]
– Joint tasks related to HITRs [JFCOM Joint Training Plan (JTP) Tab H]
• Results: Extent to which HITR-related tasks are trained by area of interest
• Findings: Coverage varies substantially by interest area – see graph next
slide
• Issues
– Target may not be 100%, some HITRs might not benefit from distance
learning
– Issues providing opportunity for expanded JKDDC attention may include
combating WMD, TTPs to defeat IEDs, maritime intercept operations,
cyberspace operations, and defensive counter air operations
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 27
Metric 4B: Percent of High Interest Training Requirements (HITR)-Related Joint Tasks
Addressed by JKDDC Courseware
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
Combating WMD 1
TTPs to Defeat IEDs 7 2
Other 3 1
Maritime Interception Ops 4 2
Defensive Counter Air Ops 3 2
Cyberspace Ops 3 2 3
Dynamic Targeting 1 1 1
Unified Action 6 1 8
Intelligence 5 7
Stability Operations 2 1 9
Irregular Warfare 2 9
Joint Fire Support 3 15
Information Operations 1 5
Airspace Management 1 1 9
Personnel Recovery Ops 5
Combat Identification 3
Strategic Communications 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Red: No tasks related to a HITR Yellow: some tasks related to a Green: all tasks related to a
addressed by JKDDC HITR addressed by JKDDC HITR addressed by JKDDC
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 28
Metric 5: Percent of CE2T2 Training Exercises Using JLVC Federation Components
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Intent: Measure the impact of CE2T2 investment in the
Joint Live Virtual Constructive (JLVC) Federation (as
defined) and the Federation’s support to CE2T2 training
exercises
• Performance target: N/A
• Data element Number of Exercises Not Supported by JLVC
Number of Exercises Supported by JLVC
– JLVC Federation components used in JNTC- 100%
Percent
45
accredited Service exercises 40
– JLVC Federation components used in CE2T2- 80% 35
supported training exercises (COCOMs) 30
60%
– CE2T2-supported COCOM exercises executed: 25
[JTIMS] 20
40%
– JNTC-accredited Service exercises executed: [SE 15
Reports/Service Spreadsheets] 20% 10
• Findings 5
0% 0
– 25% usage FY10 Q1 FY10 Q2 FY10 Q3 FY10 Q4
– JCATS high usage
– 31% do not use M&S
• Issue: Some JLVC components may have
limited use but be important to the exercise
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 29
JLVC Federation Version 3.0
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
Component Comments
JCATS
AWSIM
JSAF
JDLM
ACE-IOS
SIMPLE
JECS Use the system or individual subsystem
JMECS
JMEM
JRC
JSPA
JDAARS/JAWS
JTDS / OBS Not part of JLVC Federation 3.0, but significant
JTDS / TGS
JTDS / Weather
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 30
Metric 6A: Percent of CE2T2 Training Exercises Using JTEN
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Intent: Measure the impact of CE2T2 funding of the JTEN
to support exercises as reflected in the number of
exercises being supported. (This metric is not intended to
reflect whether support was requested and not provided.)
• Performance target: N/A Percent of CE2T2 Exercises Supported by JTEN
• Data element [data source] Exercises Supported by JTEN Exercises Not Supported by JTEN Percent
– CE2T2-supported training exercises supported by the 100% 250
JTEN [JWFC NOSC]
– JNTC-accredited Service exercises executed [Service
spreadsheets]
– JWFC Repository and NOSC reported data 80% 200
Cumulative Number of Exercises
• Findings
– 1QFY10 – 34%, similar to previous years
60% 150
– Issue with Authority to Operate approval
– Not all exercises require JTEN support
Percent
– JTEN other support 40% 100
– FY09 support to 66 exercises 33%
31%
34%
27%
• Issues
– JTEN scheduling procedures allow capture of 20% 50
multiple exercises. (Red Flag-Nellis program
schedules JTEN with Joint Kill Chain Exercise
imbedded.)
0% 0
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10Q1
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 31
Metric 6B: Percent of Service Training Exercises Supported by JNTC OPFOR
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Intent: Measure the impact of CE2T2 funding of
OPFOR support to Service exercises as reflected in
the number of exercises being supported. (This
metric is not intended to reflect whether support Percent of Live Service Exercises Supported by
was requested and not provided.) JNTC OPFOR Resources
• Performance target: N/A
Number of Service Exercises Supported by
• Data element: data source OPFOR
Number of Exercises Not Supported by OPFOR
– JNTC-accredited Service exercises executed
Percent
– JNTC-accredited Service training exercises 100% 120
supported by the JWFC OPFOR [JWFC
100
Repository] 80%
Number of Exercises
• Findings 80
60% 49% 51% 50%
Percent
– JNTC OPFOR is meeting its planned/scheduled/ 48% 46%
60
funded requirements 40%
– JNTC OPFOR systems: required - 83; fielded - 40
37.5 for 45.2% 20% 20
– Supported 54 exercises in FY09
• Issues 0% 0
FY09 FY09 FY09 FY 09 FY10Q1
– Is JNTC OPFOR funding adequate? through through through through
– Not all exercises need OPFOR support from Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
JNTC capability
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 32
HITR - High Interest Training Requirements: UJTL Tasks FY09-11,
FY10 update, JFCOM Joint Training Plan Tab H
Stability Operations (Stability operations support US
ST 2.4.1 ST 6.2.6 OP 2.3.2.1.1 OP 3.3 OP 4 OP 4.4.3 OP 4.7.8 OP 5.2
Government plans for stability, security, transition, and
OSD A T2 Assessment
JAEC reconstruction (SSTR) operations and likely will be
conducted in coordination with and in support of HN
OP 5.3 OP 5.5 OP 5.7
authorities, OGAs, IGOs, and/or NGOs.)
HITI - CJCS High Interest Training Issues*
Unified Action synchronizes, coordinates and integrates joint, ST 3.4 ST 4.3 ST 5.6 ST 8.4 ST 8.5 ST 8.5.3.2 OP 4.7.3 OP 5
single-Service, and multinational operations with the operations of
B
other US Government agencies (OGAs), intergovernmental
organizations (IGAs), and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) OP 5.1.6 OP 5.7 TA 1.2.4
Irregular Warfare (includes insurgency, terrorism, SN 3.3.2.1 ST 2.1.5.1 ST 8.1 OP 1.1 OP 1.2.8 OP 2.2.2 OP 3.1.6 OP 4.4
C disinformation, propaganda, organized criminal activity,
(such as drug trafficking)) OP 4.6.4 OP 5.3.9 TA 5
D Combating Weapons of Mass Destruction ST 9.9
Tactics, Techniques and Procedures to Defeat the
E OP 4.7.2 OP 5.5.1 OP 6.2.2.1 TA 6.9
Improvised Explosive Device System/Network
F Strategic Communication OP 5.6.1
G Information Operations OP 5.6 OP 5.6.1 OP 6.2.14 OP 6.2.2.1
H Dynamic Targeting OP 3.1.9 OP 3.2.7 TA 3.2.1.1
I Maritime Interception Operations ST 2.4.1 ST 8.5 OP 1.4.4 OP 6.1.5 TA 3.2.3
SN 2.2.2 ST 2.1.7.3 ST 2.4.1 OP 2 OP 2.2.3 OP 2.3 OP 2.3.5 OP 2.4
J Intelligence (Joint)
OP 2.4.2.4 OP 2.5 OP 6.2.2.1 TA 2
P Cyberspace Operations ST 5.1 OP 3.2.2 OP 5.1.2 OP 5.6.4 OP 5.6.5 OP 6.3.4 TA 5.2.1
OP 3.1 OP 3.1.5 OP 3.1.6.1 OP 3.1.6.2 OP 3.1.9 OP 3.2 OP 3.2.5.2 OP 3.2.7
K Joint Fire Support
OP 6.1.3 TA 2 TA 3.2.1 TA 3.2.1.1 TA 3.2.2 TA 3.2.3 TA 3.2.4 TA 3.3
Defensive Counterair Operations (includes Theater
Other interest Items
L ST 6.1.5 ST 6.1.7 TA 3.2.7
Air & Missile Defense)
OP 3.1.5 OP 5.1.10 OP 5.4.4 OP 6.2.3 OP 6.5.4 TA 3.2.3 TA 3.2.4 TA 3.2.8
M Airspace Management
TA 3.2.8.1 TA 3.3 TA 4
N Combat Identification (CID) TA 6.5
O Personnel Recovery OP 5.6.1 OP 6.2.9 TA 5.6 TA 6.2 TA 6.5
Joint Force Hqts OP 5.5
Disperse Strategic Forces SN 3.2.2
Global Strike SN 3.3.1.1 UNCLASSIFIED 33
* The HITIs here are as shown in the JFCOM JTP Tab H. This list of HITIs is found in CJCSI 3500.01E, Encl F, 31May08, which has been superseded by CJCS
WJTSC 10-1, CJCS Notice Data as of FY10 Q1
Notice 3500.01.29 Mar 20103500.01, published annually, is the only authoritative listing of current HITIs. UNCLASSIFIED 33
HITI HITR UJTL Task Program
Blue Flag
Unified
Crisis Response & TA 1 Endeavor
Limited Contingency
Stability Operations
Operations to Support
Stability Operations USFF Units
Blue Flag
Unified
OP 5.3 Endeavor
USFF Units
USFF Units
Provide SA to Plan & OP 5.2 Blue Flag
Execute Crisis Response
to Support Stability
Blue Flag
TA 2
USFF Units
Source: CJCS Note
Unified
Endeavor
Stability Plan & Execute Crisis OP 5.5
Response for USFF Units
Ops Stability/Migrant
Operations
Example, TA 1
Unified
Endeavor
FY09
USFF Units
UNCLASSIFIED 34 Source: FY09-11 JFCOM JTP Source: FY09-11 JFCOM JTP Source: FY09-11 JFCOM JTP
Metric 7A: Percent of Major Service Pre-deployment Exercises that Incorporate HITR- Related
Joint Tasks
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Intent: Measure the contribution of major Service pre-
deployment exercises to training required joint tasks.
(Includes UE program)
Note: Each quarter is counted separately, not
• Performance target: 100%.(FY09 USD(P&R) Strat. Plan)
• Data element [data source]
cumulative.
– Major Service pre-deployment exercises that
incorporate joint tasks (HITR) [JWFC Enter. Repos.] 1 Task 2 Tasks 3 Tasks
– JNTC-accredited Service exercises executed [Service 100%
spreadsheets]
– HITR-related joint tasks [JFCOM JTP Tab H ]
• Findings 80%
– Service pre-deployment programs training to at least 3
HITR related joint tasks per exercise
60%
– Minimal execution of SN and ST tasks
– FY10Q1 results: of the 90 HITR-related joint tasks, 55%
were executed. 40%
• Issues
– Need to achieve the consistent entry of tasks trained 20%
data into the JWFC Repository
– Not all JNTC-accredited Service training programs
executed are reported in the JWFC Repository 0%
– Training objectives are not translated to joint tasks for FY09 Q1 FY09 Q2 FY09 Q3 FY09 Q4 FY10 Q1
all exercises
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 35
Metric 7B: HITR-Related Joint Tasks Not Trained at JNTC-accredited Service Training Exercises
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Intent: Identify possible gaps in HITI training capability at JNTC-accredited Service training programs. The benefit of this metric is the
analysis of the actual HITR-related tasks and HITI issues not trained.
• Performance target: N/A
• Data element [data source]
– Joint tasks trained at major Service pre-deployment exercises (JNTC-accredited Service exercises and UE program) [JWFC
Enterprise Repository]
– Joint tasks associated to (HITRs) and identified to support HITIs [JFCOM JTP Tab H (FY10)]
– HITR-related joint tasks [JFCOM JTP Tab H ]
A: HITRs related to accredited Joint tasks
(including those nominated for accreditation)
trained in JNTC-accredited Service events
P: HITRs partially related to non-accredited
Joint tasks or task elements trained in JNTC-
accredited Service events
N: HITRs not related to Joint tasks trained in
JNTC-accredited Service Events
• Shows that the JNTC-accredited Service training programs have dramatically increased their
HITR coverage with accredited tasks: 25% in FY09 vs. 50%+ in FY10
• Note two other differences between FYs
– Number of HITRs: 121 in FY09 vs. 130 in FY10
– Number of accredited programs: 14 in FY09 vs. 18 in FY10
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 36
Metric 7B: HITR-Related Joint Tasks Not Trained at JNTC-accredited Service Training Exercises
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Findings
– Strategic Communications, Irregular Warfare, Stability Ops, and Cyberspace Ops
received little attention in FY09 and continue to do so in FY10
– 39 HITRs not covered by Service training programs
o 3 call for interagency understanding/involvement
o 4 deal with Intel requirements at the CJTF level
o 2 deal with medical staff assigned to a JTF headquarters
o 10 align to deployable JTF headquarters as the focus
o 2 deal with home station training
o 7 call out the use of and/or involvement of specific systems or organizations
o 3 deal with unmanned aerial systems (UAS)
o 2 have no joint tasks identified
• Issues
– Annual update to HITRs will cause some disconnect in JELC
– Not all HITR associated tasks can be trained at Service programs (SN & ST)
– Coordinate with community to identify reasons tasks are not being trained (Plan)
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 37
Metric 7B: HITR-Related Joint Tasks Not Trained at JNTC-accredited Service Training Exercises
FY09 USJFCOM Training Priorities FY10 USJFCOM Training Priorities
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
Strategic Communication 1 0 Strategic Communications 1
Irregular Warfare 8 1
Other 2 2
Stability Operations 9 3
Cyberspace Ops 4 2 2
Irregular Warfare 6 1 4
Personnel Recovery Ops 4 1
Stability Operations 6 2 4
Joint Intelligence 7 2
Combating WMD 1
Cyberspace Operations 3 1
Unified Action 5 3 7
Unified Action 13 5 3
Maritime Interception Ops 1 3 2
Maritime Interception Ops 2 4 N
TTPs to Defeat IEDs 2 3 4
P
Information Operations 4 2
Intelligence 2
A 5 5
TTPs to Defeat IEDs 6 1 3
Combat Identification 1 2
Theater Air & Missile … 2 1 1
Defensive Counter Air Ops 1 1 3
Airspace Management 8 1 6
Joint Fire Support 5 13
Joint Fire Support 6 1 6
Information Operations 1 1 4
Combating WMD 1
Personnel Recovery Ops 1 4
Combat Identification 1 2 Airspace Management 1 10
Dynamic Targeting 2 Dynamic Targeting 3
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Green: HITRs related to accredited Joint tasks Yellow: HITRs partially related to non- Red: HITRs not related to
(including those nominated for accreditation) accredited Joint tasks or task elements Joint tasks trained in JNTC-
trained in JNTC-accredited Service events trained in JNTC-accredited Service events accredited Service Events
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 38
Metric 7C: Review of joint tasks trained at JNTC-accredited Service training exercises that are
HITR-related
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Intent: Measure the contribution of JNTC-accredited Service training programs on the training of
required joint tasks.
• Performance target: N/A.
• Data element [data source]
– Joint tasks trained at major Service pre-deployment exercises (JNTC-accredited exercises only)
[JWFC Enterprise Repository]
– HITR-related Joint tasks identified to support HITIs [JFCOM JTP Tab H (FY10)]
• Findings
– The chart (next slide) shows joint tasks executed at Service Programs (and UE),
grouped by High Interest Training Issues (CJCS and JFCOM issues).
– Represents the level of effort (i.e. total tasks trained) and Joint tasks trained at Service
Programs—balanced HITR and Commander requirements
– Variance in quarters is driven by the number of exercises executed
• Issues
– Some data gaps exist in reporting of joint tasks trained in the JWFC Repository
– Note: Not all HITR tasks can be trained at all programs
– Annual update to HITR will cause some disconnect due to JELC
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 39
Metric 7C: Review of joint tasks trained at JNTC-accredited Service training exercises
that are HITR-related
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
Executed High Interest Executed High Interest & Accredited Executed, Not High Interest
Strategic Communications 1
Other 2
Cyberspace Ops 4 2 6
Irregular Warfare 7 6 12
Stability Operations 8 2 26
Combating WMD Placeholder for graph 2
Unified Action 3 1 12
Maritime Interception Ops 1 4 1
TTPs to Defeat IEDs 8 7
Intelligence 5 5 7
Combat Identification 3
Defensive Counter Air Ops 2 16
Joint Fire Support 9 32 9
Information Operations 4 5 9
Personnel Recovery Ops 6 11
Airspace Management 3 13 7
Dynamic Targeting 5 5
40
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1
UNCLASSIFIED 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 40
UNCLASSIFIED 100%
Metric 8A: Coverage of COCOM Engagement Objectives by CE2-Supported Exercises
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Intent: How do CE2-supported exercises contribute Percent of AOR-Wide Country Objectives
to the engagement objectives? Impacted
• Performance target: Contained in the Guidance for FY08 FY09
Employment of the Force (GEF) (classified)
• Data element [data source]
49%
– CE2 funded exercises [CE2 PEP] 41%
– AOR objectives/desired effects by country 20%
13% 14%
7%
[COCOM TSCMIS*]
– Exercise objectives/desired effects [COCOM PACOM CENTCOM NORTHCOM
TSCMIS]
– Critical Regional Partners [GEF] Percent of Critical Partner Country Objectives
Impacted
• Findings
FY08 FY09
– CE2 supported exercises provide
engagement support to a portion of
COCOM engagement objectives 55%
– Decrease in Critical Partner Objective 44%
training and Increase in Non-Critical 20%
13% 11% 9%
Partner Objectives
PACOM CENTCOM NORTHCOM
*TSCMIS: Theater Security Cooperation Management Information System
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 41
Metric 8B: COCOM Engagement Objectives Executed in CE2-supported Exercises
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
AOR-Wide Objectives
• Intent: How often do CE2-supported exercises FY08 FY09
contribute to the engagement objectives?
83%
• Performance target: N/A. 73%
• Data element [data source]
– CE2 funded exercises [CE2 PEP]
– AOR objectives/desired effects by country 21%
[COCOM TSCMIS] 8% 6% 6%
– Exercise objectives/desired effects
[COCOM TSCMIS] Zero Exercises Impacted One Exercise Impacted Two Exercises Impacted
– Critical Regional Partners [GEF]
• Findings Critical Partners Objectives
– Greater percentage of objectives were FY08 FY09
not addressed in FY09 than in FY08
– Critical partner objectives are more 75%
likely to be addressed in exercises 57%
than non-critical partner objectives 34%
12% 9% 10%
Zero Exercises Impacted One Exercise Impacted Two Exercises Impacted
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 42
Metric 8C: Level of Success of CE2 Exercises on Engagement Objectives
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Intent: How well do CE2-supported exercises AOR
affect engagement objectives? AOR FY08 AOR FY09
• Performance target: N/A. 61%
• Data element [data source] 53%
– CE2 funded exercises [CE2 PEP]
31%
– Exercise assessments by country objective by 24%
assessing organizations [COCOM TSCMIS] 14% 12%
• Findings 1%
4%
– Engagement objectives for CE2 exercises were
Good Success Some Success Little/No Success Insufficient
largely met (graded either Good or Some Success).
Knowledge**
– The percentage graded either Good or Some
Success was roughly the same for FY08 and FY09,
Critical Partners
and for Critical Partners compared to AOR-wide.
Critical Partners FY08 Critical Partners FY09
• Notes
– TSCMIS update is not in line with T2 assessment
quarterly reporting
61%
• Event owners have 90 days to enter 54%
assessments after exercise is completed
30%
25%
13% 12%
1% 4%
Good Success Some Success Little/No Success Insufficient
Knowledge**
**“Insufficient” means there was not enough information or observation to assess the objective
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 43
Agenda
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Contact list and introductions
• Assessment goals and framework
• FY2010 T2 Assessment Q1 IPR - draft
JAEC Assessment issues and projects
• Way ahead
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 44
Issues
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Exercise list
• Use of JTIMS to support assessment
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 45
Exercise List
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Do we need to add any exercises to the collection plan?
• List being handed out includes:
– Exercises from FY10 T2 assessment collection plan
– Exercises shown in CE2 PEP
• Stated criteria are:
Services: JNTC-accredited exercises
COCOMs: exercises supported by T2 and/or CE2
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 46
Use of JTIMS for Assessment
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
• Issue: Increasing use of JTIMS by Services and Combatant
Commands – to support T2 assessment as well as all aspects of the
JELC and JTS
– CJCSI 3500.01E, Joint Training Policy and Guidance, directs monthly
updates of TPAs and MPAs in JTIMS
• Benefits
– Standard system for scheduling interagency and international
participation; would also support assessment
– Single source for training execution…and assessment data
– Example: JAEC analyzes ratings in JTIMS, reports in classified annex
posted in JDEIS
• Costs / impediments
• What is the best way to increase use of JTIMS?
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 47
Assessment Projects
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
1. JNTC PBR MOEs. Work with JNTC to 6. Enterprise view of joint training
develop effective measures of effectiveness in outcomes. Examine JTIMS data for common
PBRs. and significant trends, positive and negative.
Formerly an assessment analysis topic, de-
2. Intergovernmental and listed for FY10.
multinational participation targets.
Collaborate with community to revise 7. JTF-capable Service HQ. Track DRRS
performance targets for intergovernmental comments for Service and Service component
and multinational participation in exercises. HQ that have been designated by their
COCOM as JTF-capable. Formerly an
3. Increase use of JTIMS for assessment analysis topic, de-listed for FY10.
assessment. Increase Service and COCOM
use of JTIMS, especially for the T2 asmt. 8. Timeline display of NYCU keywords.
Effective representation of keyword
4. JTEN ROI. Work with JNTC to develop accomplishments from News You Can Use.
indicators of return on investment for JTEN.
9. Pre-deployment training for RC. Work
5. IW/SO metrics. Develop more useful with OSD Reserve Affairs on methodology and
metrics related to IW/SO using existing data. targets for measuring Reserve Component unit
participation in JNTC-accredited exercises.
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 48
Next Steps
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
Monthly telcon 6 April
Formal staffing of intergovernmental and Soon
multinational military targets
FY10 Q2 data inputs due 20 April
Convert assessment Collection Plan into “T2 Spring
Guidance” document to supplement DoD
Directive
…and others based on the assessment projects
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 49
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
Questions?
Contacts:
Dr Shep Barge, JAEC Director: Shep.Barge@osd.mil
Faraz Ashraff, JAEC analyst: Faraz.Ashraff.ctr@osd.mil
David Baranek, JAEC analyst: David.Baranek.ctr@osd.mil
Tony Handy, JAEC JTS Specialist: Anthony.Handy.ctr@osd.mil
John Ross, JAEC analyst at JFCOM: John.Ross.ctr@jfcom.mil
John Thurman, JAEC analyst: John.Thurman.ctr@osd.mil
Stephanie Woodring, JAEC analyst: Stephanie.Woodring.ctr@osd.mil
Stan Horowitz, IDA analyst supporting JAEC: Shorowit@ida.org
Dr John Morrison, IDA analyst supporting JAEC: JMorriso@ida.org
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 50
50
Participation Trends: 4 Years of Q1
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
Interagency International
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 51
HITI HITR UJTL Task Program
Blue Flag
Unified
Crisis Response & TA 1 Endeavor
Limited Contingency
Stability Operations
Operations to Support
Stability Operations USFF Units
Blue Flag
Unified
OP 5.3 Endeavor
MARFOR
USFF Units
MARFOR
USFF Units
Provide SA to Plan & OP 5.2 Blue Flag
Execute Crisis Response
to Support Stability
Blue Flag
TA 2
USFF Units
Source: CJCS Note
Unified
Endeavor
Stability Plan & Execute Crisis OP 5.5
Response for USFF Units MEF
Ops Stability/Migrant
Operations
Example, TA 1
Unified
Endeavor
FY10
USFF Units
UNCLASSIFIED 52 Source: FY10-11 JFCOM JTP Source: FY10-11 JFCOM JTP Source: FY10-11 JFCOM JTP
HITI HITR UJTL Task Program
Virtual Flag
Red Flag -
Expanded Maritime ST 8.5 Nellis
Maritime
Intercept Operations &
Interception USFF Units
WMD Maritime
Ops Interception
Virtual Flag
OP 1.5.2 Red Flag -
Nellis
USFF Units
OP 1.4.4
Virtual Flag
Red Flag -
Nellis
USFF Units
Virtual Flag
Conduct Interdiction
TA 3.2.3 Red Flag -
Operations
Nellis
Source: CJCS Note
FST (USN)
Maritime
JTFEX (USN)
Intercept
Example, Conduct Maritime
OP 1.4.4
FY09 Interception Operations
UNCLASSIFIED 53 Source: FY09-11 JFCOM JTP Source: FY09-11 JFCOM JTP Source: FY09-11 JFCOM JTP
HITI HITR UJTL Task Program
Virtual Flag
Red Flag -
Expanded Maritime ST 8.5 Nellis
Maritime
Intercept Operations &
Interception USFF Units
WMD Maritime
Ops Interception
Virtual Flag
OP 1.5.2 Red Flag -
Nellis
USFF Units
OP 1.4.4
Virtual Flag
Red Flag -
Nellis
USFF Units
Virtual Flag
Conduct Interdiction
TA 3.2.3 Red Flag -
Operations
Nellis
Source: CJCS Note
FST (USN)
Maritime
JTFEX (USN)
Intercept
Example, Conduct Maritime Blue Flag
OP 1.4.4
FY10 Interception Operations
FST (USN)
UNCLASSIFIED 54 Source: FY10-11 JFCOM JTP Source: FY10-11 JFCOM JTP JTFEX (USN)
Assessment Framework – FY2009
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
Enterprise Priority Analysis Topics
1. JNTC-accredited unit training accomplished prior to deployment
Joint training
accomplished prior to 2. Joint Task Force Headquarters staff collective training
deployment
3. Joint Task Force Headquarters staff individual training (JKDDC contribution)
Irregular warfare
4. Irregular warfare and stability operations at Service training centers
training
Whole of government 5. Whole of government training
and international
training 6. International participation in training exercises
7. Enterprise view of joint training outcomes
Impact of joint training
8. CE2T2 impact on qualifying joint officers
9. Distributed network for joint training
Impact of joint training 10. Research and development for joint training
enablers 11. Implementation of Joint Training Information Management System
12. Implementation of Joint Lessons Learned Information System
13. Impact of CE2T2 on meeting Service requirements
Implementation of joint
14. Impact of CE2T2 on meeting COCOMs requirements
training
15. Impact of CE2T2 meeting individual joint training requirements
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 55
TSCMIS is system for source data
OSD JAEC T2 Assessment
Are the countries identified? Y Y Y Y Y Y
Are the exercises/events identified? Y Y Y Y Y Y
Are assessments included? N Y Y Y Y Y
Is the assessment by effect of exercise/
event on engagement objective N Y N Y Y N
Is the assessment by country? N Y N Y Y N
Are the country objectives/desired
effects evaluated? N Y Y Y Y Y
Are the higher level strategic objectives
or endstates evaluated? N N N N N N
Is the assessment color coded? N Y N Y Y Y
Likert or some other scale used? N N Y N N N
Annual basis? N Y Y Y Y Y
As exercise/event completed? N Y N Y Y N
COCOM roll up? N N Y Y Y Y
WJTSC 10-1, 29 Mar 2010 Data as of FY10 Q1 UNCLASSIFIED 56
