.
.
One area Mr. Jordan should prioritize is a review of the FBI’s Integrated Program Management (IPM) processes. Developed and implemented a decade ago, the FBI utilizes IPM to “prioritize threats, allocate resources, and measure performance.” On its face, the FBI attempts to operate like a large corporation with budgets and metrics for success. Heck, they have a colorful, consultant-approved chart to prove it.
CHART (i0.wp.com)
IPM establishes a strict calendar during which FBI Headquarters engages in Threat Review Prioritization (TRP). Later, FBI executive managers and personnel in the field undertake Field Office Strategic Planning (FOSP). There is a seemingly endless stream of meetings, phone calls, and emails involving supervising agents, intelligence staff, program coordinators, and mission support analysts. The final product is a convoluted matrix marrying the FBI’s national, local, and standing threat priorities with mitigation criteria.
MATRIX (i0.wp.com)
Clear as mud? Allow me to provide a simpler explanation. The FBI’s IPM process applies the principles of Minority Report to predict investigative and intelligence-gathering activities in the coming fiscal year. It combines these prophecies with analytics more appropriate for Moneyball to measure performance based on how many metrics are achieved. The problem is that, unlike the movies, we do not have the ability to accurately prognosticate criminal activity. Moreover, achieving predetermined benchmarks is tied to FBI executives’ compensation. Consequently, the FBI’s corrupted incentive structure favors case quantity over quality and encourages employees to deploy their creative faculties to game the system for artificial statistical accomplishments instead of focusing on true casework.
.
.
.more
Archived Article (archive.ph)
Source Article (uncoverdc.com)
>.
.
One area Mr. Jordan should prioritize is a review of the FBI’s Integrated Program Management (IPM) processes. Developed and implemented a decade ago, the FBI utilizes IPM to “prioritize threats, allocate resources, and measure performance.” On its face, the FBI attempts to operate like a large corporation with budgets and metrics for success. Heck, they have a colorful, consultant-approved chart to prove it.
>[CHART](https://i0.wp.com/www.uncoverdc.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Picture1.jpg)
>IPM establishes a strict calendar during which FBI Headquarters engages in Threat Review Prioritization (TRP). Later, FBI executive managers and personnel in the field undertake Field Office Strategic Planning (FOSP). There is a seemingly endless stream of meetings, phone calls, and emails involving supervising agents, intelligence staff, program coordinators, and mission support analysts. The final product is a convoluted matrix marrying the FBI’s national, local, and standing threat priorities with mitigation criteria.
>[MATRIX](https://i0.wp.com/www.uncoverdc.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/Picture2.jpg)
>Clear as mud? Allow me to provide a simpler explanation. The FBI’s IPM process applies the principles of Minority Report to predict investigative and intelligence-gathering activities in the coming fiscal year. It combines these prophecies with analytics more appropriate for Moneyball to measure performance based on how many metrics are achieved. The problem is that, unlike the movies, we do not have the ability to accurately prognosticate criminal activity. Moreover, achieving predetermined benchmarks is tied to FBI executives’ compensation. Consequently, the FBI’s corrupted incentive structure favors case quantity over quality and encourages employees to deploy their creative faculties to game the system for artificial statistical accomplishments instead of focusing on true casework.
.
.
.more
[Archived Article](https://archive.ph/RzwFS)
[Source Article](https://www.uncoverdc.com/2023/02/09/fbi-imitates-minority-report-and-moneyball/)
(post is archived)