OSD Readiness and Training CE2T2 Assessments JAEC Assessment Working Group WJTSC 09-1 23 Mar 2009 This briefing is UNCLASSIFIED Joint Assessment and Enabling Capability OSD Readiness and Training Policy and Programs AS OF 17 MAR 2009 1

0815-0845 Meeting objectives & assessment overview Agenda 0800-0815 Introduction 0815-0845 Meeting objectives & assessment overview 0845-0900 Data collection process 0900-1015 Framework & metrics Gaps Improvement plans Input from community 1015-1100 Way ahead, wrap-up

Please update the contact list as necessary Introductions Please update the contact list as necessary Request SIPRNet email for at least one person each organization Blank lines on last pages Around the room Analysts who support JAEC assessment

Improve data processes Discuss changes to metrics Meeting Objectives Improve data processes Discuss changes to metrics Changes would have to be approved by leadership Identify issues for other meetings 1-on-1 with JAEC analysts at WJTSC Other options: monthly update telcon, ad hoc telcon This isn’t an IPR We will focus on process and metrics instead of analysis Major discussion topics may be noted for other meetings

CE2T2 Assessment Purpose Sep 2008 Brief to T2 Leadership Purpose of CE2T2 Assessments Communicate goals and performance to members of the enterprise Help all members of the enterprise track performance Inform T2 and CE2 leadership of significant trends and the impact of training programs Support key enterprise decision making Provide key information on the program to support dialogue with professional congressional staff members Enterprise assessment will identify trends across the Services and COCOMs to demonstrate relevance and impact of joint training

Leadership Priorities Six leadership priorities focus our assessment: Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training Intent of the assessment is to provide an assessment of these six areas. 6

Build Framework to the Enterprise View Effectiveness of training in improving mission performance Level of Metric HIGH LOW Ease of Quantifying HARDEST EASIEST Best Source of Data OPERATORS TRAINERS PROGRAMMERS Exercises accomplished Individual training accomplished Setting up exercises that provide training in the priority areas: - joint - irregular warfare - whole of government - multinational We keep this in mind as we develop metrics. Process for funding and managing CE2T2 Funding of software/hardware enablers for CE2T2 Providing resources for exercise training Our assessment is focused at the enterprise level - we want to get as close to the top as possible using the best available metric A metric without the data is not useful

Assessment Framework & Lead Analysts Enterprise Priority Analysis Topics Lead Analyst Joint training accomplished prior to deployment 1. JNTC-accredited unit joint training accomplished prior to deployment Tony Handy 2. Joint Task Force Headquarters staff collective training 3. Joint Task Force Headquarters staff individual training (JKDDC contribution) Stan Horowitz Irregular warfare training 4. Irregular warfare and stability operations at Service training centers Jennifer Rausch Whole of government and international training 5. Whole of government training 6. International participation in training exercises Impact of joint training 7. Enterprise view of joint training outcomes John Morrison 8. CE2T2 impact on qualifying joint officers Impact of joint training enablers 9. Distributed network for joint training John Ross 10. Research and development for joint training 11. Implementation of Joint Training Information Management System 12. Implementation of Joint Lessons Learned Information System Implementation of joint training 13. Impact of CE2T2 on meeting Service event requirements John Morrison & John Ross 14. Impact of CE2T2 on meeting COCOMs event requirements 15. Impact of CE2T2 meeting individual joint training requirements

Data Collection Process

Data Collection Process Goal: use existing data sources to the maximum extent (JTIMS, other sites, deployment schedules, training schedules, etc.) Reality: JAEC has found value in Service and COCOM review of data - Verification and Validation (V&V) Actions JAEC continues to gather data approx 1/20, 4/20, 7/20, and 10/20 JAEC emails preliminary data to Services and COCOMs for review, makes corrections, and establishes business rules Individual organization concerns – see Mr. Tony Handy

Reference: JTIMS Event Module Data Elements for CE2T2 Assessment (1) Entry Screen JTIMS Role Training Program Training Program Name Description tab User Group Lead, Event Manager Program Sponsoring Command JNTC Accredited Training Events/Exercises Event Name User Group Lead, Event Manager, Event Team Lead Employment Start Date Details tab Employment End Date Tasks Trained Training Objective Tab User Group Lead, Event Team Lead Task Description

Reference: JTIMS Event Module Data Elements for CE2T2 Assessment (2) Entry Screen JTIMS Role Training Events/Exercises UIC Force Tab, Force Provider Interface Force Provider Participating Unit Name / Agency Name Organization Affiliation Participating Interagency Name Participating Coalition Unit Name Affiliation Type Was JTEN Used? Simulation tab User Group Lead, Event Team Lead

Analysis Topics

Assessment Framework & Lead Analysts Enterprise Priority Analysis Topics Lead Analyst Joint training accomplished prior to deployment 1. JNTC-accredited unit joint training accomplished prior to deployment Tony Handy 2. Joint Task Force Headquarters staff collective training 3. Joint Task Force Headquarters staff individual training (JKDDC contribution) Stan Horowitz Irregular warfare training 4. Irregular warfare and stability operations at Service training centers Jennifer Rausch Whole of government and international training 5. Whole of government training 6. International participation in training exercises Impact of joint training 7. Enterprise view of joint training outcomes John Morrison 8. CE2T2 impact on qualifying joint officers Impact of joint training enablers 9. Distributed network for joint training John Ross 10. Research and development for joint training 11. Implementation of Joint Training Information Management System 12. Implementation of Joint Lessons Learned Information System Implementation of joint training 13. Impact of CE2T2 on meeting Service event requirements John Morrison & John Ross 14. Impact of CE2T2 on meeting COCOMs event requirements 15. Impact of CE2T2 meeting individual joint training requirements

Active Duty Combat Units 1. JNTC-Accredited Unit Joint Training Accomplished Prior to Deployment Metric Percent of units deployed to combat operations that participated in JNTC-accredited Service joint training prior to deploying Notes: Unit = commanded by an O-5 or above Top-level metric shows active duty combat units, but JAEC also has data for CS and CSS, and RC Findings Participation rate continues to exceed target levels Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training Quarterly Active Duty Combat Units Target (Annual) Potential Future Developments Address operational deployments in addition to combat deployments Verify accuracy of RC data for inclusion and analysis

2. Joint Task Force Headquarters Staff Collective Training Metrics a. Percent of deployed JTF HQ* that participated in Unified Endeavor (UE) mission readiness exercise (MRX) b. Status of JTF-capable headquarters reporting readiness in DRRS *JTF HQ: Joint Task Force Headquarters Findings 100% of units deployed as rotational JTF HQ participated in UE MRXs b. Of the 8 certified JTF-capable headquarters: 6 have current reports in DRRS 3 commented that readiness ratings were verified/certified by performance in training exercises 2 stated concern over preserving staff training level and expanding staff and individual training opportunities Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training Rotational JTF HQ – only two: CJTF 101 (Combined Joint Task Force Afghanistan): rotating Army Division HQ as core element, plus Indiv Aug MNF-I-Iraq: rotating Army Corps HQ, plus Indiv Aug Operational - examples: CJTF HOA MNC-I Combined Security Transition Command Afgh. Potential Future Development Expand analysis to rotational and operational JTF HQ reporting in DRRS * From the Draft JTF HQ CONOPS: JTF-capable: A Designated Service HQ that has achieved and can sustain a level of readiness to stand up as a JTF HQ, which is acceptable to the supported/assigned Combatant Commander.

Newly-reporting personnel in Q1 FY09 3. Joint Task Force Headquarters Staff Individual Training (JKDDC Contribution) Metric Percent of JTF staff receiving theater-focused JKDDC training before deployment - Initial pilot study addressed CJTF-HOA* * Combined Joint Task Force - Horn of Africa Findings Initial findings indicated relatively small percent of CJTF-HOA staff trained in JKDDC; however, more recent findings show dramatic increases Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training Entire staff Newly-reporting personnel in Q1 FY09 Q4 FY08 Q1 FY09 Total 273 272 77 JKO Trained 24 78 39 % JKO Trained 9% 29% 51% Potential Future Development Expand analysis beyond CJTF-HOA; options include: Cooperation of other JTF HQ J1s Use DMDC data to identify assigned personnel

4. Irregular Warfare and Stability Operations at Service Training Centers Metric Percent of service units training in irregular warfare and stability operations (IW/SO) at major service training centers Note: Unit = commanded by an O-5 or above Findings Continuing into FY09, Service data indicate training centers exceed targets Each Service has a different target, driven by the contemporary operating environment. Percentage of events at Service training centers that included IW/SO: Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training Service FY08 Q1 FY09 Target Army 100% 90% Navy 89% 60% Air Force 75% Marine Corps Major Training Centers Army: NTC, JRTC, JMRC, and BCTP, all train IW/SO in their scenarios. Navy: Air Wing Fallon, FST-J, CJTFX, and Expeditionary Strike Groups called CERTEXs (not a JNTC accredited program). FST-J trained in IW/SO and the CERTEX address IW/SO for one of its training units. Air Force: Green Flags (East and West), Red Flag Alaska, Red Flag Nellis, Blue Flags. All address IW/SO from an Air Force perspective, principally close air support (CAS). Marine Corps: Mojave Viper (29 PALMS), MSTP (Marine Staff Training Program at Quantico). Mojave Viper and MSTP address IW/SO. Potential Future Developments Leave as is?

5. Whole of Government Training Metric Percentage of joint training events that include participation by interagency personnel Note: events are JNTC-accredited Service training events and COCOM events supported by CE2 or T2 funding Findings General trend has been slightly declining participation Differences between COCOMs and Services (only recently disaggregated) may represent differing requirements Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training Potential Future Developments Identify requirements and performance targets (RTPP lead) Improve definitions JAEC understand each organization’s JTIMS reporting practices

6. International Participation in Training Exercises Metric Percentage of joint training events that include participation by international personnel Note: events are JNTC-accredited Service training events and COCOM events supported by CE2 or T2 funding Findings General trend has been slightly increasing participation Differences between COCOMs and Services (only recently disaggregated) may represent differing requirements Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training Potential Future Developments Identify requirements and performance targets (RTPP lead) Improve definitions JAEC understand each organization’s JTIMS reporting practices

7. Enterprise View of Joint Training Outcomes Metrics a. Portion of COCOM tasks trained in COCOM and Service exercises, and training proficiency assessments of performance on those tasks b. Common strengths and weaknesses across the enterprise Findings a. 48% of JMETs had published assessments in JTIMS (Data manually extracted from COCOM Joint Training Plans (JTPs) published at the end of FY08) b. Assessments showed some strengths and weaknesses that were common across the COCOMs, as well as some striking deficiencies that were more local Specific findings available in classified forum Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training Potential Future Development Automate process to provide semi-annual or quarterly updates (JAEC and JTIMS Program Office action)

8. CE2T2 Impact on Qualifying Joint Officers Metric Fraction of Joint Qualified Officer (JQO) points generated by JKDDC-provided individual training Findings Points awarded through distributed learning up 58% from the third quarter of FY 2007 As of November 2008 163 Joint Qualified Officer Points have been available through JFCOM-certified courses 129 through institutional courses 34 using distributed learning (1 blended course) 1 point per 40 hours of training Points are also awarded for joint experience Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training FY 07 FY08 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Institut. Learning Distrib. Learning 137 150 164 202 205 216 Experience Total Potential Future Development Working with JS J1 to complete the chart

9. Distributed Network for Joint Training Metric Joint Training and Experimentation Network (JTEN) usage in CE2T2 exercises as reflected by the following data (PBR 821) Findings Almost every metric indicates increasing JTEN usage from FY06 to FY08 Prorated Q1 FY09 data (4X) suggests that increases will be sustained into FY09 (Table in backup) Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training Potential Future Development None planned

10. Research and Development for Joint Training Metrics Value of R&D programs as determined by the following data (PBRs 718 and 721): a. Status of accomplishing 13 certifications and 17 assessments (PBR 718) b. Number of times virtual AC-130 simulation was integrated into National Training Center (NTC), MAGTF Training Center (Mojave Viper), and Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC) rotations in FY09 (PBR 721) Findings Data are collected and reported by JATTL as part of the PBR process Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training Potential Future Development This is based on PBR measures of effectiveness submitted in 2008

11. Implementation of Joint Training Information Management System Findings a. All COCOM CE2T2 events in JTIMS, minority of events provide training objective or audience data b. 6 of the 10 COCOMs had Approved Training Assessments in JTIMS ~ 40% of Core Mission, Command-Level JMETs have published assessments (Tables in backup) Metrics a. Percentage of COCOM CE2T2 events that provide specific data* in JTIMS b. Percentage of COCOMs publishing assessments in JTIMS * Data: training objective or audience Note: JTIMS is funded by PBR 11001. Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training Potential Future Development None planned

12. Implementation of Joint Lessons Learned Information System Metric/Statistics Use of the Joint Lessons Learned Information System (JLLIS) as indicated by the following data: Since 1 Oct 07, 27 organizations have signed up to use JLLIS Joint Staff 1 COCOMs 10 3 Services + NGB 4 CSA-4, Interag’cy-3 7 Other organizations 5 Number of JLLIS Users Number of Active Lessons Findings Trend analysis requires dedicated analysts; currently no automated tool. The USMC Center for Lessons Learned, USAF, and USN have been instrumental in the outstanding progress JLLIS has made over the past 18 months. Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training Sep 07 Sep 08 CY09 Q1 CY09 Q2 NIPR 9,584 23,456 28,550 SIPR 5,607 10,475 15,623 Sep 07 Sep 08 CY09 Q1 CY09 Q2 NIPR 7,244 25,800 29,855 SIPR 16,671 89,462 99,328 SOURCE FOR SLIDE AND NOTES: From: Ball, Shelby G CTR JCS J7 JTD Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 3:57 PM To: Handy, Anthony; Handy, Anthony B CTR OSD PR Cc: Fenoli, Richard M LTC JCS J7 JTD; Lent Tucker, Diane F CTR JCS J7 JETD; Barr, James E CTR JCS J7 JETD; Grubich, Joseph M COL JCS J7 Subject: CE2T2 Assessment FY2009 Q1 Importance: High Tony, Attached is our slide with comments in the note pages. We added statistics to metrics (Metrics/Statistics) because we don't have good metrics at this time, and Users and Active Lessons provide good starting point statistics in the tables. Give me a call if you have any questions. Mr. Shelby Ball Joint Lessons Learned Integrator JS J7/JETD, Lessons Learned Branch Rm 2C714, The Pentagon 703-695-2263 DSN 225 703-695-9827 FAX shelby.ball@js.pentagon.mil shelby.ball@js.pentagon.smil.mil Potential Future Developments By Oct 09, JLLIS should be FOC with all COCOMs using and sharing data via JLLIS and all legacy data imported into the system. As JLLIS establishes linkages between its stakeholders and other systems, the current statistics can be expanded to provide better metrics on the integration of JLLIS data in DOTMLPF programs. (PBR 11007)

13. Impact of CE2T2 on Meeting Service Event Requirements Metrics a. Percent of training objectives* addressed by JNTC-accredited Service training programs b. Number of events impacted by the Joint Training Coordination Program (JTCP) (PBRs 2306, 921, 903B, and 903A) Findings a. 29 objectives (24%) are addressed by JNTC-accredited tasks trained in program b. Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training FY2008 Service events impacted by JTCP JCTP-supported participation in other-Service events Army 7 Navy 9 6 Marine Corps 5 4 Air Force *JFCOM JTP identified 121 unique training objectives, derived from 16 training priorities identified in OSD published guidance. Each objective comprises one or more UJT, relevant conditions, and a training standard. Participation in other Service Events: Air Force also supported/participated in 7 other events (3 FST-J, 2 JTFEX, 1 AWF and 1 WTI) Army supported/participated in 7 other events (2 VF, 1 BF, 2 FST-J, 1 AWF and 1 WTI) Marine Corps supported/participated in 4 other events (1 BF and 3 FST-J) Navy supported/participated in 6 other events (3 RF, 1 BF and 2 WTI) SOCOM supported/participated in 2 events (1 JTFEX and 1 WTI) Additions for FY09 – funding will expand to include: Air Force Green Flag SOCOM Emerald Warrior Army NTC & JRTC Potential Future Development TBD

14. Impact of CE2T2 on Meeting COCOM Event Requirements Metric Percent of COCOM training requirements addressed by CE2T2 training events Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training Findings “Training requirements” defined by command-level JMETs in COCOM JMETLs The results indicate that the 25 CE2T2 events that occurred in Q1 FY2009 trained about ¼ of the COCOMs’ training requirements as defined Potential Future Development TBD

15. Impact of CE2T2 on Meeting Individual Joint Training Requirements Metric Percent of COCOM joint mission essential tasks (JMETs) addressed by JKDDC courseware – command and supporting Findings Joint training accomplished prior to combat deployment Irregular warfare training Whole of government and international training Impact of joint training Impact of joint training enablers Implementation of joint training End of FY07 End of FY08 Q1 FY09 Number of JMETs addressed by JKDDC courses 524 (est.) 860 878 Percent of JMETs addressed by JKDDC courses 15% (est.) 24% Potential Future Development TBD LAST ANALYSIS TOPIC SLIDE

CE2T2 Assessment Way Ahead Next 60 days Exploit existing qualitative data sources Examples: News You Can Use, JNTC SE Event Summaries Expand use of DRRS Training-related comments Pending business intelligence tool should help Publish planned documents Collection plan: “reference” for the community DoD Instruction: assessment portion If necessary, JSAP as a temporary measure until DoDI is published (AO-to-AO) Develop or refine performance targets where appropriate Collaborate with community, approved by leadership Longer term Pursue identified Potential Future Developments Prepare and vet FY2009 annual assessment; initial draft at WJTSC 09-2

Questions? Contacts: 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 31

FY09 Q1 Summary Assessment (1) Presented at T2 JIPT, 23 Feb 2009 Joint training accomplished prior to deployment Unit participation in accredited training events continues to exceed goals Deployed JTF HQ staff training (MRXs) appears to meet requirements Comments in DRRS on collective training for JTF-capable HQ reveal concern over maintaining currency Irregular warfare and stability operations training Training exceeds goals Whole of government and international training OSD(RTPP), Joint Staff J7 (JETD) working on developing definitions and requirements

FY09 Q1 Summary Assessment (2) Presented at T2 JIPT, 23 Feb 2009 Impact of joint training Results showed some strengths and weaknesses that were common across the COCOMs, as well as some striking deficiencies that were more local – details are classified JKDDC/JS J7 contribution to Joint Qualified Officer program is increasing Impact of joint training enablers Almost every metric indicates increasing Joint Training and Experimentation Network (JTEN) usage since FY2006 Initial data from Joint Lessons Learned Information System (JLLIS) show steep increase in number of users and active lessons Other metrics rely on data not yet available, including PBR measures of effectiveness

FY09 Q1 Summary Assessment (3) Presented at T2 JIPT, 23 Feb 2009 Implementation of joint training JNTC-accredited Service training programs addressed 24% of the 121 training objectives identified by USJFCOM* CE2T2 events in Q1 FY09 trained about ¼ of command-level JMETs in COCOM JMETLs JKDDC online resources addressed 24% of JMETs in COCOM JMETLs, an increase from 15% end of FY07 CORRECTED AFTER THE JIPT: bullet related to JKDDC incorrectly said “command-level” JMETs. *The JFCOM Joint Training Plan, Tab H, lists 16 priorities derived from strategic guidance and COCOM inputs, divided into 121 training objectives. The objectives themselves comprise one or more UJTL tasks, relevant conditions, and a training standard.

JTF Capable HQ / Command Analysis Topic 2b: Joint Task Force Headquarters Staff Collective Training Assessment Reporting by JTF-Capable Headquarters COCOM JTF Capable HQ / Command Service UIC Joint UIC JTF HQ Task(s) in METL? DRRS Assessment Date AFRICOM Southern European Task Force (formerly EUCOM) WJHEAA Yes 15 DEC 2008 EUCOM 6th Fleet N57042 24 JUL 2006 3rd Air Force FFDJ30 No JFCOM 2nd Fleet / JTF-South N08961 DJ2C2F 20 JAN 2009 PACOM COMPACFLT / JTF 519 N00070 DJ5519 13 JAN 2009 7th Fleet / JTF 507 N57024 DJ5507 9 JAN 2009 NORTHCOM 5th Army / USARNORTH WJMHAA 6 JAN 2009 SOUTHCOM 6th Army / USARSOUTH WJMWAA Plan to certify five additional headquarters in FY2009: 7th Army, III MEF, 20th Support Command, 5th Fleet/USNAVCENT, 3rd Army/USARCENT

Analysis Topic 9. Distributed Network for Joint Training Metric FY06 FY07 FY08 Q1 FY09 Total Events 40 69 88 26 COCOM Events 12 28 41 15 Service Events 47 11 CE2T2 Events 31 45 70 23 Non-CE2T2 Events 9 24 18 3 JTEN Hours Used 10,923 17,376 26,683 7638 CE2T2 Hours 9,831 15,638 24,464 Non-CE2T2 Hours 1,092 1,738 2,219 Participating Sites (Incl Hub Sites) 219 404 432 149 First-time Use Sites 5 1

No. / % with Trng Tasks or Audience No. / with Trng Tasks or Audience Analysis Topic 11a. Implementation of Joint Training Information Management System Percentage of COCOM CE2T2 Events that Provide Certain Data in JTIMS Type of Event FY 08 Events Q1 FY 09 Events Total Events No. / % with Trng Tasks or Audience No. / with Trng Tasks or Audience COCOM CE2T2 128 45 / 35% 25 11 / 44% USAF Accredited 7 6 / 86% USN Accredited 3 3 / 100%

Analysis Topic 11b. Implementation of Joint Training Information Management System Approved Training Assessments in JTIMS As of 5 Jan 2009 COCOM Assessments in JTIMS Core CMD METs in JMETL Core CMD JMETS Assessed in Percent Assessed AFRICOM 9 0% CENTCOM 11 10 91% EUCOM 100% JFCOM 15 NORTHCOM PACOM 12 SOCOM SOUTHCOM 2 20% STRATCOM 7 5 71% TRANSCOM 6 Totals 106 44 42% REFERENCE: Joint Training and Policy Guidance, CJCSI 3500.01E, dated 31 May 2008, enclosure D, Joint Training Guidance, paragraph 2e: Evaluations of training proficiency during joint training events will feed overall assessments of joint mission-essential tasks (JMETs) and mission capabilities, which in turn feed the plans phase of the JTS to focus joint training events in the next training cycle to cover identified capability gaps. Likewise, the mission training assessments will feed the commander’s or agency director’s broader readiness assessment to determine gaps and deficiencies in performing the command or agency J/AMETL to standard. To emphasize this necessary focus on operational readiness and the alignment of the JTIMS with DRRS monthly reporting, each organization will review, update (as required), and approve monthly their TPAs and MTAs in the JTIMS. Once approved in the JTIMS, the TPAs are then pushed to DRRS and made available in the Training Tab to support overall readiness assessment. Ref: CJCSI 3500.01E, dated 31 May 2008, enclosure D, Joint Training Guidance, paragraph 2e JTIMS: Joint Training Information Management System