examine three of the commission’s major recommendations most relevant to IC management and oversight.
This is a research paper, in the format of a staff study, focused on one of the Presidential or national commission reports listed below as assigned. (Specific reports will be assigned to provide a balance and diversity of coverage). Very briefly summarize the historical and organizational context and rationale for the study, its participants and methodology, and the major enduring issues it addressed, particularly as they relate to the management challenges facing today’s US Intelligence Community. To that end, examine three of the commission’s major recommendations most relevant to IC management and oversight. Some of the recommendations are broadly stated, encompassing several disparate issues and actions. In that case, tighten your focus on one of them to allow a more deep and comprehensive analysis within the space allowed. Summarize the issues or problems the recommendations were intended to address, the alternatives considered, and the support or opposition of major stakeholders at the time. Your analysis of the assigned report must be informed and supported by specific reference (e.g. by page number) to at least a dozen other authoritative sources (besides the assigned report), located through the UMGC library, six of which are to be drawn from this course’s materials. List only those references explicitly cited in the paper. Any non-course references used must be from online sources and must be traceable or they cannot be used. For any reference not readily and freely accessible on the web, attach a short extract of the section cited to the end of the paper, following the Reference List. (Not included in the page count). Rather than cut and pasting extensive quotations from the assigned study, I would prefer you thoroughly paraphrase that content, and integrate it with your own analysis and perhaps that of other sources. Where possible, provide an actual or hypothetical illustration of the item at issue. Evaluate the immediate and longer term impact of the implementation (or lack thereof) of each recommendation, the advantages and disadvantages that have become apparent since, and assess if each has been as effective as intended as well as any unintended consequences, positive or adverse. Your conclusions should be a value judgment based on specific criteria relevant to IC management and oversight, rooted in the comprehension and appreciation gained from the application, analysis, and synthesis of the content of your sources.
Your staff study is due at the end of week 11. There are no additional discussion topics for week 11 and the only assigned readings are those you review as research for your paper. Make sure that you review the instructions for the paper (see Week 2). Allow yourself enough time to review and proofread your paper. No reviewer enjoys fighting through typos, misspellings, and poorly organized papers. I will be also using “TurnItIn” in my review, though in my UMUC experience bibliographic entries, quotations and terminology result in many of the “false positives” and no cause for concern. The week is set aside for your final research and writing of your paper focused on several of the recommendation from one the following Commissions (as previously assigned).
• Preparing for the 21st Century: An Appraisal of U.S. Intelligence (1996), commissioned by Congress to examine the state of US intelligence. Also referred to as the Aspin-Brown Commission report.
• Final Report of the National Commission on the Terrorist Attacks on the United States (2004) Also known as the 9/11 Commission report
• Report of the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction. (2004) A presidential commission’s unclassified report. There was also a classified annex not made public. Referred to as the WMD Commission report.
• IC21: Intelligence Community in the 21st Century- (1996) Staff Study by the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence House, of Representatives One Hundred Fourth Congress.
Your paper should be in the format of a modified staff study (guidance attached):
• Approximately 14-15 pages in length (not counting the Reference List and any additional notes), double space, “Times New Roman,” 12-point font. (Word or compatible).
• Use the proper APA citation style, with citation within the text specifying page numbers; from sources that do not contain pages. Instead, please use the best available substitute identifying element that makes sense: a paragraph, a chapter number, a section number, a table number, or something else. Some works (like Congressional Bills) may use special location identifiers. A last resort may be the position in a line count.
• Attach a Reference List of those sources actually cited, annotated to very briefly evaluate the value of each reference used.
• Refer to at least a dozen other authoritative sources, besides the assigned study, at least six of which are course references. Possibly these six would be those identified in your tentative selection of course references to be used for the final paper for Weeks 3 , 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10. (Note: cite each document in a collection or anthology such as Litt’s, with different authors, as a separate source.)
• The Reference List is limited to those references explicitly cited in the paper.