popp the school of public policy peace operations policy program gmu information age metrics working...
TRANSCRIPT
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
Information Age Metrics Working Group (IAMWG).
Operations Analysis in CivilianOrganizations
15 October 2004
David F. DavisDirector, Peace Operations Policy Program
(703) [email protected]
http://popp.gmu.edu
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
BackgroundThe international intervention in Iraq consists of both military and civilian organizations. Operations Research support to this intervention has been overwhelmingly focused on the military dimension.
This focus is cultural. The military is used to it, and the civilians are not. This presentation covers one analysis that was done for the Coalition Provisional Authority during the period of May – August 2004. Although this analysis informed some of the decisions, it is not possible to say that the analysis caused any decisions. However, it was a start.
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
The Allocation
How can we propose a reallocation of the $18.4B?This effort 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 May 2004, the IRMO Planning office began to look at this issue from a goals based perspective.
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
A Diversion
Analysis to plan:
Unified Concept Plan – ORHAStrategic Plan – CPALegislative Requirements – CPA/EmbassyMission Performance Plan – Embassy
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
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.
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
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
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
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
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
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
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
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
53 993
0
Ongoing or CompletedMillion US$ (June 04)
USAID project money only, does not include program overhead and direct salariesPMO as of 14 June 2004, USAID as of 17 June 2004
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
Ongoing or CompletedMillion US$
USAID project money only, does not include program overhead and direct salaries
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
$3,162M
$243.5M
13:1
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
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.
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
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.
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
Review
Scoring:
Contribution of Projects to GoalsContribution of Projects to SectorsContribution of Goals to Mission
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
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
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
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)
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
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
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
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
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
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
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
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
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
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
POPPThe School of Public Policy
Peace Operations Policy Program GMU
The Issues
Culture of AnalysisIntent of the Office v. Background of the DirectorAsking questions for which answers are desired