#CIA #IntelligenceAnalysis #Criteria https://share.google/aimode/FlwSuWswUKeWz1ugM Intelligence Analysis Criteria Explained Intelligence analysis criteria are the formal standards used to ensure that information is transformed into high-quality, actionable “finished” intelligence. These standards are primarily defined by Intelligence Community Directive (ICD) 203, which governs all U.S. intelligence agencies. 📷 http://DNI.gov +3 Core Analytic Standards (ICD 203) To be considered high quality, an intelligence product must meet five foundational criteria: 📷http://DNI.gov +3 Objective: Analysis must be unbiased, independent of political pressure, and not designed to support a specific policy

#CIA  #IntelligenceAnalysis  #Criteria
share.google/aimode/FlwSuWsw…
Intelligence Analysis Criteria Explained
Intelligence analysis criteria are
the formal standards used to ensure that information is transformed into high-quality, actionable “finished” intelligence. These standards are primarily defined by Intelligence Community Directive (ICD) 203, which governs all U.S. intelligence agencies.
📷 DNI.gov +3
Core Analytic Standards (ICD 203)
To be considered high quality, an intelligence product must meet five foundational criteria:
📷 DNI.gov +3
Objective: Analysis must be unbiased, independent of political pressure, and not designed to support a specific policy or outcome.
Timely: It must be delivered while it is still useful for decision-making. Information delivered too late to be acted upon is considered a failure of the process.
Based on All Available Sources: Analysts must use all relevant information, identify what is missing (intelligence gaps), and work with collectors to fill those gaps.
Unbiased/Independent of Politics: It must be free from “politicization” and should not result from pressure to produce specific conclusions.
Exhibits Analytic Tradecraft: It must follow rigorous logical methods, such as Structured Analytic Techniques (SATs), to minimize cognitive biases.📷 DNI.gov +6
Analytic Tradecraft Principles
Beyond the core standards, several specific principles define the “logic” of the analysis:
📷 DNI.gov +3
Sourcing Reliability: Analysts must explicitly describe the quality and credibility of their sources and the data used.
Uncertainty Levels: Every judgment must include an assessment of probability or “level of confidence” (e.g., “high confidence,” “moderate confidence”) to show how certain the analyst is.
Logical Consistency: The conclusions must flow naturally from the evidence. Analysts often use Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) to test multiple explanations and avoid jumping to a single conclusion.
Clarity and Brevity: Reports typically follow the Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF) format—stating the main conclusion first, followed by supporting evidence.📷 DNI.gov +4
Success Criteria for the “Customer”
For the person receiving the intelligence (the “customer”), the product is evaluated based on:
📷Wikipedia +2
Relevance: Does it answer the specific questions or intelligence requirements the decision-maker has?
Actionability: Does it provide enough detail for the leader to take a specific action (e.g., move troops, change a business strategy, or issue a warning)?
Foresight: Does it go beyond just describing what is happening to explain why it is happening and what might happen next (predictive or prescriptive analysis)?📷ThreatConnect +4
If you’re interested, I can explain:
How Structured Analytic Techniques (SATs) like the “Pre-Mortem” or “Red Teaming” work
How to write a BLUF-style report
The different levels of Confidence Ratings used in intelligence assessments

— Michael Novakhov (@mikenov) Feb 21, 2026