The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

Chapter 6 ______________________________________ 

IG Inspections Process - The Execution Phase 

Section 6-1 – Step 7: Visit Commands 

Section 6-2 – Step 8: In-process Review (IPR) 

Section 6-3 – Step 9: Update Commander 

Section 6-4 – Step 10: Analyze Results and Crosswalk 

Section 6-5 – Step 11: Out-brief Proponent

6-1
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

Chapter 6 ____________________________________ 

IG Inspections Process - The Execution Phase 

1. Purpose: This section discusses the five steps of the Execution Phase within the 

Inspections Process. 

2. The Execution Phase: The Execution Phase of the IG Inspections Process 

represents the heart of the inspection since inspectors will spend this phase gathering 

and analyzing information. The Execution Phase has five discrete steps (see Figure 6-

1), but some of these steps may be repeated several times before progressing to the 

next step (for example, Visit Commands and IPR). The five steps of the Execution 

Phase follows: 

a. Visit Commands 

b. In-Process Review (IPR) 

c. Update the Commander 

d. Analyze Results and Crosswalk 

e. Out-Brief the Proponent 

 Joint IG IG InspInspections Process ections Process E x e c u tio n

Step 10

Analyze 

Results and 

Crosswalk

Section 6-4

Step 7

Visit 

Commands

Section 6-1

Step 8

In Process 

Review (IPR)

Section 6-2

Step 9

Update the 

Commander

Section 6-3

Step 11

Out Brief 

Proponent

Section 6-5

Figure 6-1 

The Execution Phase 

6-2
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

Section 6-1 ____________________________________ 

The Execution Phase 

Step 7: Visit Commands 

1. Visit Units: The IG inspection team will put into practice their validated methodology 

and information-gathering tools during this step of the Execution Phase. At the end of 

the visit, the inspection team will conduct an In-Process Review (explained in greater 

detail in Step 8) with the sole purpose of developing an out-briefing to present to the unit 

leadership upon the team's departure. 

2. Actions Following a Unit Visit: Some inspection teams may develop an inspection 

schedule that affords them one day between visits or several days between visits. In 

any case, the team must craft a detailed Trip Report (the only physical output of this step) 

that captures the critical information gleaned during that visit. The Trip Report should be 

in memorandum format and include a paragraph for each interview and sensing session 

conducted, each document reviewed, and each event observed. These paragraphs will 

appear in the Trip Report as an observation and will include four possible types of 

information: 

 

a. Raw-data information: Unprocessed examples of what the inspector saw, 

read, or heard. 

b. Synthesized information: Sentences that combine raw-data information in 

an effort to summarize that information. 

c. Analyzed information: Sentences that critically examine and process rawdata information in an effort to glean greater meaning from the data. 

 

d. Inspector's opinion: Sentences that capture the inspector's sense or 

impression of the event observed or people interviewed. 

The Trip Reports will serve as the primary-source documents for writing the Final Report, 

so ensure they are thorough, accurate, and complete. The longer the inspection team 

waits before writing a Trip Report, the more information the team will lose. 

3. Writing the Trip Report: The Team Leader or Team Deputy is normally responsible 

for setting writing deadlines, compiling the completed paragraphs, and then editing the 

final product for content and grammar. Each member of the team must contribute to the 

report. 

a. Setting a Writing Deadline: The Team Leader or Team Deputy is responsible 

for setting a clear, reasonable writing deadline aimed at completing the Trip Report 

before embarking upon the next inspection visit. 

 

b. Writing the Sub-Paragraphs: Each team member must write paragraphs that 

capture the results of interviews, sensing sessions, observations, and document reviews 

they conducted or participated. These paragraphs must follow the inspection team's 

prescribed Trip-Report format precisely. 

6-3
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

6-4

c. Compiling the Trip Report: The Team Leader or Team Deputy will compile 

the completed Trip Report (electronically if possible) and then edit the document for 

comprehension, readability, format, and grammar. 

 

d. Signing and Approving the Trip Report: The Team Deputy will submit the Trip 

Report to the Team Leader for final review and signature. All original, signed copies of 

Trip Reports will go into the inspection team's archive file or book along with a copy of 

the unit out-briefing slides. 

A trip report is required for every visit. On the next page is a sample of one Trip Report 

for an IO Inspection. 
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

COMMAND LETTERHEAD 

 21 November 20XX 

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD 

 

SUBJECT: Intelligence Oversight Inspection of G-2 

1. General. One team composed of two Joint Inspectors General and one member of the II MEF 

Staff as a Temporary Assistant Inspector General (TAIG) conducted an assessment of the IO 

Program within command G-2. 

2. Team Composition. 

Team: 

LtCol Steel (DCIG) 

Maj Rock (AIG) 

MGySgt Marine (TAIG, MEF Intelligence Oversight) 

3. Scope of the Visit: To determine the effectiveness of the Intelligence Oversight (IO) Program 

in the G-2 via computer searches, document reviews, and interviews / sensing sessions with G-2 

and SJA personnel and leadership. 

4. Observations. 

a. Interview Findings: 

(1) Observation 1 (Sub-Tasks 1.3, 1.5, 1.6, and 1.8). Interview with the 

Intelligence Oversight Officer (Capt Nerdo). Capt Nerdo has served as the Intelligence 

Oversight (IO) Officer for seven months. He is fully aware of the correct regulations and source 

documents pertaining to Intelligence Oversight. He produced a copy of his orders appointing him 

as the IO Officer; the commander had signed the document on 18 July 2XXX. In addition, Capt 

Nerdo explained fully the unit's IO training program and his involvement in that program. He also 

correctly explained the process for processing a QIA up through the IGMC. 

b. Sensing Sessions;

 (1) Observation 1: (Sub-Tasks 1.4 and 1.8) Sensing Session with Junior 

Enlisted Troops. Personnel interviewed were able to define who / what constitutes a U.S. 

Person and could provide proper references when asked. 

(2) Observation 2: (Sub-Tasks 1.3, 1.5, and 1.8) Sensing Session with Senior 

Non-Commissioned Officers in the G-2 Staff Section. All G-2 non-commissioned officers 

interviewed knew the IO Officer's name. The IO officer personally provides all IO training so that 

all trained personnel recognize the IO Officer. There are also several notices located in 

conspicuous locations throughout the command identifying the IO Officer and providing his 

contact information. 

c. Documents Reviewed: 

(1) Observation 1: (Sub-Task 1.1 and Sub-Task 1.2) Determine if all 

applicable publications are on hand. All required references are on hand. CG Memorandums 

and the G-2 Annex provide specifics above and beyond what DoD regulations require. The 

commander appointed the Intelligence Oversight Officer in writing, and visual aids are posted 

throughout the G-2 work area. 

6-5
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

(2) Observation 2 (Sub-Task 3.2). Standing Operating Procedure (SOP). The 

use of a detailed, updated, and MARCENT specific local G-2 SOP helps to ensure the 

standardization of daily operating procedures and activities. 

(3) Observation 3 (Sub-Task 3.4). Training Records. Over the past three 

months, the percentage of G-2 personnel that are currently trained has been steadily declining, 

going from 80% down to 60%. According to the G-2 and the Intelligence Oversight Officer, the G2 is not scheduled to have an IO training session until February / March time frame. 

(4) Observation 3 (Sub-Task 3.2). Training Materials. Reviewed the training 

material used to conduct the required annual IO training events. The G-2 has established a 

training program to ensure all G-2 personnel are trained on the IO program’s intent and 

responsibilities and that training is properly tracked. Maj Happy, the G-2 Intelligence Oversight 

Officer, has developed an outstanding, detailed IO training program, including real-world 

examples, interactive slides, and written tests that can be used as a standard for future IO 

training. 

5. Good News Story. Good accountability and integration of Commercial, Law Enforcement 

Sensitive (LES), and other U.S. Person information was demonstrated throughout the IO 

Inspection. It was apparent that general awareness of the legal constraints involved in IO / 

Sensitive Data was present throughout the G-2.

6. Additional Information. None 

//original signed// 

 J. P. Steel 

 LtCol, DCIG 

Encl: 

Out-briefing Slide Packet 

[Footer for all pages:] 

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 

Take note of the level of detail involved in each paragraph. The more detail each 

inspector adds -- the better! The Good News information located in paragraph five is 

from the out-briefing (not presented here). Also, note the footer that must appear at the 

bottom of each page. 

 

4. Inspector General Information: Trip Reports are not redacted (edited) for 

attribution. Instead, Trip Reports list units and interviewees by name in case the team 

members need to know the source of the information for potential cross-walking issues 

at a later time. Since IGs must protect this information in order to protect confidentiality, 

a footer must appear at the bottom of each page (see the example above) that reminds 

an IG (and others) that the information is FOUO (For Official Use Only). Only redacted 

reports -- or reports edited for attribution -- can be released under Exemption 5 of the 

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). 

6-6
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

Section 6-2 ____________________________________ 

The Execution Phase 

Step 8: In-Process Review (IPR) 

1. Purpose of the In-Process Review (IPR): An In-Process Review (IPR) is a meeting 

of inspection team members for the sole purpose of compiling and sharing information 

gathered during a single or multiple inspection visits. By sharing key information at the 

IPR, team members can gain a perspective on where the inspection results are leading 

and what patterns and trends are beginning to appear. Generally, IGs convene IPRs for 

two different reasons and purposes: 

 

a. Immediately following an inspection visit to a unit or command with the sole 

purpose of sharing information to produce an out-briefing. Conducting daily team 

IPRs at the inspection location is essential. If the visit to the unit or command lasts for 

two or three days, the team must gather at the end of each day to share data gleaned 

from the day's information-gathering activities. If the visit to the unit or agency lasts only 

one day, the team will conduct one IPR and produce the out-briefing at the end of the 

meeting. 

 

b. Periodically, during the course of an inspection, to share information gathered 

at several units to identify trends and patterns. The Team Leader of the overall 

inspection effort may decide to convene IPRs at the IG office following every third or 

fourth unit visit. The purpose of these IPRs will be to share information gathered from 

several units so the team can identify developing trends and patterns. 

These two products -- the out-briefing and trend analysis -- represent two potential 

physical outputs of an IPR. IPRs may occur to generate other products as well. 

2. IPR Analysis Tools: Sharing information during an IPR can be a challenge. The 

best method for sharing information or developing trends is to develop a method (or 

methods) that captures the information and presents it visually so that everyone on the 

inspection team can see the information and discuss it. Two recommended IPR analysis 

tools are discussed below. 

 

a. The IPR Worksheet: This worksheet brings together the key points that all 

members of the team gleaned from their interviews, sensing sessions, document 

reviews, and observations at a particular unit or units. The best technique for capturing 

and sharing this data is to draw an IPR Worksheet on butcher-block paper and add 

everyone's comments. A sample IPR Worksheet is in figure 6-2: 

6-7
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

IPR WORKSHEET

Location(s): __________________________ (Date) 

Team / Team 

Member Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4 Objective 5

Figure 6-2 

IPR Worksheet 

The inspection team may add more rows to the worksheet as necessary based upon the 

number of teams or the number of team members. 

 

b. Trends Analysis Sheet: This sheet will allow the assembled inspection team 

to review present and past IPR Worksheets and list any obvious trends. A sample 

Trends Analysis Sheet is in figure 6-3: 

TRENDS ANALYSIS

TREND UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT

Figure 6-3 

Trends Analysis 

6-8
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

3. Conducting the IPR: The overarching purpose of all IPRs is to share information; 

however, the output of each IPR may vary. IPRs conducted at the end of a unit visit will 

produce an out-briefing; however, IPRs conducted periodically at the IG office during the 

course of the inspection will consider information from several units and produce trends 

and patterns. An IPR should occur as follows: 

 

a. Presentation of the IPR agenda by the Team Leader. 

 

b. Review of the next day's itinerary or upcoming unit itineraries. 

c. Discussion of any administrative data or requirements. 

d. Completion of the IPR Worksheet. The best technique for completing the IPR 

Worksheet is to sketch out a worksheet matrix on butcher-chart paper with one objective 

per sheet. The Team Leader will then call upon each team or individual to mention 

those items that pertain to that objective. The process can stop for discussions and 

explanations as necessary. The person designated to develop the out-briefing slides will 

develop the briefing directly from this worksheet. A sample version of a completed IPR 

Worksheet for a shortage of IO training in G-2 appears in figure 6-4. 

 

IPR WORKSHEET

 Location(s): G-2 (20 Nov____)

Inspector 

Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 

LtCol Steel - G-2 was very 

knowledgeable about the 

IO Program and was able 

to articulate the details 

clearly. 

- Dep G-2 confirmed 

findings with regard to G-2 

knowledge of the IO 

Program. 

- Decline in IO training 

being conducted over the 

past year. 

 

- The command was 

manned at 93% of 

allocated strength; 

however, G-2 manning 

was at 72%. 

Maj Rock - Finding time to train is 

difficult due to the high 

optempo. 

- Although being 

conducted, G-2 enlisted 

leadership did not feel IO 

training requirements are 

properly captured in the 

unit training plan. 

- Disconnect between 

expansion of mission 

operational requirements 

and cross-check of 

personnel skill sets on 

board. 

MGySgt 

Marine 

- Longer working hours 

and mission creep with 

fewer personnel on station. 

- G-2 training has steadily 

declined over past year. 

More attention to the legal 

basis for IO is desired. 

Figure 6-4 

IO IPR Worksheet 

6-9
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

Note that this inspection only had three objectives and one team. This IPR Worksheet 

has been completed by team members, suggesting an IPR conducted at a unit for the 

purpose of developing an out-briefing. 

e. Develop the out-briefing or complete the Trends Analysis Sheet (see 

paragraphs four and five below). 

f. Final comments and guidance from the team. 

The sample agenda outlined above can apply to all IPRs. The inspection team should 

develop a standard agenda that the team can follow routinely without much preparation. 

4. Developing the Out-Briefing: The out-briefing is the IG team’s way of providing 

some form of interim (or in some cases definitive) feedback on the results of a particular 

inspection. The team must recognize that the information presented during the outbriefing has not had the benefit of close analysis or scrutiny. The team should not 

attempt to discuss issues or observations that require further post-visit analysis. 

 

a. Writing the Out-Briefing: The Team Leader (or team member designated to 

develop the out-briefing) will draft bullet comments from the information captured on the 

IPR Worksheet during the IPR. The Team Leader must use discretion and not offer 

feedback on any issue the team has yet to analyze fully or validate. The Team Leader 

must also avoid attributing command names and individual names to the information 

offered. The only exception is for the slide depicting Good-News Observations, which 

may mention specific personnel and command. Finally, the summary slide should never 

state definitively that any unit or command’s particular program is good or bad. 

 

b. Reviewing the Draft Out-Briefing: The team will reserve time at the end of the 

IPR (or during the last IPR for extended visits) to review or build the out-brief. The team 

members will offer input and comments and make any necessary changes to the 

language. 

c. Preparing the Out-Briefing for Presentation: The Team Leader or designated 

scribe will develop the out-briefing slides using the established format. A sample outbriefing presentation appears starting on the next page: 

 

 

 

6-10
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

Out Briefing

LTC Army Mr. Scot

OCOM IG COCOM IG

S

I

2

Intelligence Oversight Program

C

pecial Inspection of the

ntelligence Oversight Program ce Oversight Program

-3 August 2xxx

Out Briefing 

LtCol Steel MGySgt Marine 

DCIG TAIG 

Special Inspection of 

Intelligence Oversight Program 

2-3 August 2XXX 

Purpose

z To provide feedback to the Commander 

 the Joint IG’s inspection of the 

elligence Oversight (IO) Program 

on

Int

within JTF-I.

Purpose 

 To provide feedback to the Commander on 

the IG’s inspection of the Intelligence 

Oversight (IO) Program within the MEF 

6-11
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

Inspection Goal

z The goal of this inspection was to 

determine if the IO program at JTF-I was 

being implemented in a manner 

consistent with the direction provided by 

the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense 

for Intelligence Oversight (ATSD IO), 

DoD 5240.1-R, and EO 12333.

Inspection Goal 

The goal of this inspection was to 

determine if the IO

being implemente

by the Assistant to the Secretary

Defense for Intelligence Oversight 

 program at I MEF was 

d in a manner 

consistent with the direction provided 

 of 

(ATSD IO), DoD 5240.1-R, and EO 12333 

Inspection Intent

z ermine if 

th

st

z h 

Jz

pr

r

z C reetly.

z

Conduct an inspection of JTF-I to det

e IO Program in place meets DoD 

andards.

Conduct sensing sessions and interviews wit

2 and SJA personnel.

Review IO related documents and intelligence

oducts and search computer hard/shared 

d ives.

onduct the inspection open and disc

No surprises!

Inspection Intent 

Conduct an inspection of I MEF to 

determine if if the IO Program in place 

meets DoD standards. 

Conduct sensing sessions and interviews 

with G-2 and SJA personnel. 

Review IO related documents and 

intelligence products and search computer 

hard/shared drives 

Conduct the inspection open and 

discreetly. 

No suprises

6-12
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

Inspection Objectives

z

n

z D

in issions are 

o

z D

im

outline in Procedures 2, 3, 4, 14, and 15 

of DoD 5240.1-R and E.O. 12333.

Determine if JTF-I Intel personnel 

u derstand IO policies.

etermine if JTF-I Intel personnel 

volved in ongoing m

c nducting adequate IO training.

etermine if JTF-I Intel personnel are 

plementing the critical IO tasks as 

Inspection Objectives 

Determine if I MEF Intel personnel 

understand IO policies. 

Determine if I MEF Intel personnel involved 

in ongoing missions are conducting 

adequate IO training. 

Determin if I MEF Intel personnel are 

implementing the critical IO tasks as o

in Procedures 2, 3, 4, 14, and 15 of DoD 

5240.1-R and E.O. 12333 

utline 

Good News Observations

z T

ha

ra

z A tire 

o

z IO

z There is a ionship 

between the JTF J-2 and the SJA.

J F-I has a strong IO training program and 

s implemented real-world events into the 

t ining.

strong IO awareness permeates the en

c mmand from the top down.

 is not seen as a hindrance to the unit 

mission but rather as an enabler.

 very strong working relat

Good News Observations 

I MEF has a strong IO training program and 

has implemented real-world events into 

training. 

A strong IO awareness permeates the e

command from the top down. 

ntire 

IO is not seen as a hindrance to the unit 

mission but rather as a enabler. 

There is a very strong working relationship 

between the I MEF G-2 and SJA. 

6-13
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

Intelligence Oversight Program

z Observations

z Command memos and the J-2 Annex 

provide specifics above and beyond DoDIs.

z IOO personally provides training.

z Self-inspection same standard as IG.

z SJA involvement.

z Entire JTF staff receiving IO training.

Intelligence Oversight Program 

Observations 

o Command memos and the G-2 Annex 

provide specifics above and beyond 

DoDIs. 

o 100 personally provides training. 

o Self-inspection same standard as IG. 

o SJA involvement. 

o Entire I MEF staff receiving IO 

training. 

Intelligence Oversight Program

z Documents Reviewed

z JT k 

had al

severa

review s 

provid IO 

ma r

z Th

the Da briefings revealed 

no 

z The J- f the 

hard d ewed revealed no IO violations.

F-I Intelligence Oversight Officer Program Boo

l required documents on hand, to include 

l additional items (point papers, legal 

s, etc.). These additional document

ed further guidance/clarification on

tte s.

e past 30 days of the Weekly Intel Update and

ily Commander’s Update

 IO violations.

2 shared drive as well as 30% (3 of 10) o

rives revi

Intelligence Oversight Program 

Documents Reviewed 

o I MEF Intelligence Oversight Officer Program 

Book had all required documents on hand, to 

include several additional items (point papers, 

legal reviews, etc.). These additional 

documents provided further 

guidance/clarification on IO matters. 

o The past 30 days of the Weekly Intel Update 

and the Daily Commander’s Update briefings 

revealed no IO violations. 

o The G-2 shared drive as well as 30% (3 of 10) 

of the hard drives reviewed revealed no IO 

violations.

6-14
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

Intelligence Oversight Program

z Interviews and Sensing Sessions

z All individuals present are aware of the restrictions 

and limitations regarding US Persons Information 

and IO.

z IO is not viewed as “a problem” to the analysts. 

They understand the importance of abiding by the 

rules and do not feel that it limits their ability to 

accomplish the mission.

z Additional training provided by the SJA would 

provide more in-depth information/explanation to 

some of the legal issues involved in IO.

Interviews and Sensing Sessions 

o All individuals present are aware of the 

restrictions and limitations regarding US 

Persons Information and IO. 

o IO is not viewed as “a problem” to the analysts. 

They understand the importance of abiding by 

the rules and do not feel that it limits their ability 

to accomplish the mission. 

o Additonal training provided by the SJA wold 

provide more in-depth information/explanation 

to some of the legal issues involved in IO. 

Intelligence Oversight Program 

Summary

z It is evident that a strong emphasis is placed 

on protecting the rights and privacy of US 

citizens in the command.

z A follow-on meeting between the J-2 and SJA 

has been coordinated to design and schedule 

a more in-depth IO training program.

z Excellent support and cooperation was 

provided to the inspection team. 

z Thank you for your support.

 

Summary 

It is evident that a strong emphasis is 

placed on protecting the rights and privacy 

of US citizens in the command. 

A follow-on meeting between the G-2 and 

SJA has been coordinated to design and 

schedule a more in-depth IO training 

programs. 

Excellent support and cooperation was 

provided to the inspection team. 

Thank you for your support. 

Semper fi 

6-15
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

4. Developing Trends and Patterns: The Team Leader will have a designated 

scribe create a Trends Analysis Sheet (see figure 6-5) format on butcher-block 

paper so that the team members can see the information. The Team Leader will 

ask the team members to nominate any trends that have appeared during the 

course of the inspection. This process will either validate or invalidate the trend. 

A sample Trends Analysis Sheet for an Intelligence Oversight inspection appears 

below. Note: MEU X and MEU Y are units previously inspected; the units 

appear here to illustrate the cumulative nature of trends over time to verify or 

validate existing trends and identify emerging trends. 

TRENDS ANALYSIS

TREND MEU-X MEU-Y G-2 Intelligence 

1. G/S-2s 

understand DoD 

directed IO 

Program 

requirements

S-2 lacked detailed 

knowledge of IO 

program 

requirements

S-2 well versed in 

IO program 

requirements 

G-2 had strong 

background in IO 

program 

requirements / 

training

2. Increased 

workload due to 

gapped G/S-2 

billets

Officer and enlisted 

leadership well 

aware of increased 

workload due to 

gapped critical S-2 

billets

Officer and enlisted 

leadership well 

aware of increased 

workload due to 

gapped critical S-2 

billets

Indoctrination 

course incorporated 

IO training to cover 

requirements 

lowering the stress 

on the G-2 

personnel

3. Analysts 

understand DoD 

directed IO 

Program 

requirements 

S-2 Analysts lacked 

detailed knowledge 

of IO program 

requirements

S-2 Analysts well 

versed in IO 

program 

requirements

G-2 Analysts well 

versed in IO 

program 

requirements

4. Morale is good Poor morale due to 

stress of additional 

duties and working 

hours coupled with 

lack of IO training 

and guidance 

Good morale Excellent morale 

due to wellplanned training 

program for the unit 

Figure 6-5 

IO Trends Analysis 

6-16
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

Section 6-3 ____________________________________ 

The Execution Phase 

Step 9: Update the Commander 

1. Updating the Commander: The commander who directed the inspection may 

request a mid-inspection update from the inspection team. This update should be part of 

the inspection timeline. The physical output of this step is the update briefing for the 

commander. 

 

2. Information Source: Since the inspection team cannot pause in the middle of the 

actual inspection to analyze results and develop findings, the inspection team must rely 

on the trends or patterns captured during the periodic IPRs (normally conducted every 

third or fourth inspection visit). 

3. Briefing Outline: Since the commander may not recall the details of the inspection 

concept, the inspection team should design the briefing to remind the commander of the 

inspection plan and to provide the commander with the most current trends. A 

recommended slide outline (or agenda) is as follows: 

(1) Purpose of the Briefing 

(2) Inspection Goal (or Purpose) 

(3) Inspection Objectives 

 

(4) Task Organization 

(5) Inspection Concept 

(6) List of units or agencies that the team (or teams) has visited followed 

by a list of the remaining units or agencies to visit 

(7) Inspection Timeline 

(8) Trends (bullets taken directly from the Trends Analysis Sheet) (Trends 

are based on previous annual IO inspections of G-2 intelligence components. 

6-17
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

6-18

Section 6-4 ____________________________________ 

The Execution Phase 

Step 10: Analyze Results and Cross-Walk 

1. Drafting the Final Report: Analyzing results means the Team Leader must 

organize the inspection team to write a draft version of the Final Report, which is the 

only physical output of this step. Before beginning this step, all visits to units or 

agencies must be complete, and the Trip Reports for each visit must be finished. The 

timeline must give the team members time to analyze the results, write their findings, 

and conduct cross-walking as necessary. The Final Report must also follow the format 

prescribed by the Team Leader. During the Completion Phase, all information-gathering 

activities cease. 

 

2. Cross-walking: Cross-walking is the process of verifying inspection results. In other 

words, an IG inspector may need to check with other sources or agencies to verify -- or 

validate -- what he or she saw, read, or heard during the conduct of the inspection. 

Cross-walking may take an IG inspector up the chain (vertically) or across command 

lines (horizontally). 

 

3. Final Report Format: Every unit or command will have different requirements or 

SOPs for staff products and reports. IG inspection reports should follow unit or 

command guidelines as closely as possible to ensure compliance with the local SOP. 

However, final inspection reports are not brief memorandums that are a few pages in 

length. Reports are normally quite lengthy and detailed. The recommended format for a 

final inspection report is as follows: 

 

a. Table of Contents 

b. Guidance on the release of IG information 

c. Executive Summary (perhaps the most widely read portion of the report!) 

d. Separate chapters on the inspection Background and Methodology 

e. Chapters for each Objective with the findings presented by Sub-Task 

f. Summary of the Recommendations (usually separated by proponent) 

g. Appendices: 

(1) References 

(2) Inspection Directive (signed copy) 

(3) List of units or commands visited 

(4) Interview and Sensing-Session questions 
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

4. Task Organizing the Inspection Team: The Team Leader must organize the team 

to write the Final Report and assign specific responsibilities to each team member. The 

Team Leader should organize the team as follows: 

 

a. Overseer of the Writing Process: This person is normally the Team Leader, 

who is usually not responsible for writing any portion of the report. 

 

b. Writers for each Objective Chapter: The team members assigned to write 

the main chapter objectives are normally the IGs and not the Temporary Assistant IGs 

(TAIGs). 

 

c. Chapter-Review Committee: The Team Leader will establish a ChapterReview Committee to review all chapters for logical sufficiency and general correctness. 

d. Writer for the Background and Methodology Chapters: The team 

member who writes these two chapters is normally the Team Deputy. Much of this 

information will come directly from the initial planning documents such as the Detailed 

Inspection Plan. 

e. Final Editor and Reviewer: The Team Leader usually takes this assignment; 

however, the Team Leader may select someone from within the team who has excellent 

grammar skills and writing abilities. 

 

5. Writing an Objective Chapter: The writer must first begin by reviewing the chapter 

format established by the Team Leader. At a minimum, the chapter format will have the 

Joint IG writer developing no less than one finding statement per Sub-Task. This guide 

outlines a nine-step process any IG inspector can use to analyze results and develop 

findings for a particular Sub-Task. After developing the findings section for each SubTask, organize the chapter as follows: 

a. Objective 1: 

(1) Sub-Task 1: 

(a) Finding 1 (write out the entire five-paragraph findings section 

under each finding heading) 

 (b) Finding 2 

(2) Sub-Task 2: 

(a) Finding 1 

(b) Finding 2 

(3) Sub-Task 3: 

Finding 

6. The Nine-Step Process for Developing a Finding Statement: The nine-step 

process outlined below is designed for IG writers to develop one finding statement (and 

findings section) at a time. Repeat this process for each Sub-Task. If the inspection 

objective has five Sub-Tasks, then follow the first seven steps of this process five 

different times before completing steps eight and nine. The nine-step process is as 

follows: 

 

a. Step 1: Gather the Tools: Print copies of all Trip Reports the team 

produced for each visit to a unit or agency. The Trip Reports will serve as the primarysource documents for the chapter. Have on hand all key references that pertain to the 

6-19
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

inspection as well as a copy of the Marine Corps Inspector General Program Inspections 

Guide. Lastly, gather highlighters of different colors to color-code the information on the 

Trip Reports as you read through them. 

 

b. Step 2: Develop a Writing Schedule: Craft a calendar plan identifying 

specific days to work on a particular Sub-Task or portion of the chapter. Next, review 

the writing schedule to ensure it meets the overall report-writing timeline established by 

the Team Leader. 

 

c. Step 3: Organize Your Sources: Gather the Trip Reports and write bold 

headings at the top of each one using a colored pen or marker to distinguish easily and 

quickly one from the other. 

d. Step 4: Review and Study Your Sources: This phase of the writing 

process is normally called pre-writing. Go through each Trip Report and use the 

different colored markers to highlight the information for each of your Sub-Tasks. Use a 

different color for each Sub-Task. 

e. Step 5: Develop Tools to Collect and Analyze Your Information: After 

absorbing the information and crafting a draft finding statement (or statements), develop 

a tool to help you organize your thoughts and the information gathered. If the 

preponderance of information from the Trip Reports supports the draft finding statement, 

then the statement is accurate. Conduct cross-walking as necessary for additional 

information or for clarification. Call or visit those individuals or agencies you think can 

help you validate inspection information. 

 

f. Step 6: Develop Your Finding Statements: Refine the language of the draft 

finding statement (or statements) as necessary. The finding statement is a single, wellfocused, well-structured sentence that captures the true essence of the finding. This 

sentence must be able to stand alone. You will base your finding statement (or 

statements) on the preponderance of information you gather about a particular Sub-Task. 

Here is an example of a finding statement: 

Several commands in the MARCENT AOR have significant problems meeting 

the DoD guidance on Intelligence Oversight. 

 

g. Step 7: Write Your Findings Sections: Follow the recommended findingssection format when writing all of the information that applies to the finding. The format 

is: 

(1) Finding Statement 

(2) Standard 

(3) Inspection Results (Discussion) 

(4) Root Cause 

(5) Recommendation(s) 

Each Sub-Task will have at least one findings section; some Sub-Tasks may have two or 

three finding statements and sections. Be certain to include positive findings and not 

just negative. Good-news stories are always welcome. In paragraph two, Standard, 

write, verbatim, the entire standard for that finding from the original source. Do not 

paraphrase the text. In paragraph three, Inspection Results, address each and every 

6-20
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

point to support the finding. For paragraph four, Root Cause, follow the Root Cause 

Analysis Model to describe the reasons for compliance or non-compliance (don't know, 

can't comply, and won't comply). Finally, in paragraph five, Recommendation, ensure 

each recommendation is detailed and identifies the person or staff agency who can fix 

the problem. 

 

h. Step 8: Complete the Chapter: Compile all of the completed findings 

sections into one document using the established chapter format. 

 

i. Step 9: Submit the Chapter for Peer and Committee Review: Let 

someone else read the draft chapter and point out obvious errors or inconsistencies. 

Make necessary changes and submit a clean copy to the Team Leader for a final 

grammar and format review. A graphic representation of the Committee Review process 

is in figure 6-6: 

Step 9: Submit the Chapter for Peer and 

Committee Review 

Draft 

Chapter 

Team Leader 

Review 

Editing 

Committee 

Review 

Committee 

Meeting 

Revise 

Chapter 

Start 

Start 

Figure 6-6 

Peer and Committee Review Process 

6-21
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

7. Practical Example of the Nine-Step Process: To review an example of this 

process, please see the Marine Corps Inspector General Program Inspections Guide, 

page 6-4-5.

 

8. The Final Result: The final result of this step is a draft version of the Final Report. 

The Team Leader will compile the approved chapters into the draft Final Report and use 

that draft to develop a slide presentation for the proponents and the commander. The 

inspection team must consider the report a draft at this stage because the commander 

has not yet approved the results. 

9. Questionable Intelligence Activity (QIA): If the inspection team discovers any QIAs 

during the inspection, the team must send a report immediately IAW the ATSD (IO) 

guidance on reporting QIAs. The IG team may need to submit the QIA report separately 

from the inspection report to ensure compliance with required timelines. 

 

6-22
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

Section 6-5 ____________________________________ 

The Execution Phase 

Step 11: Out-Brief the Proponent 

1. Identifying the Proponent: The proponents are the individuals or staff agencies the 

IG team identified in the recommendation paragraphs to fix the identified problems. 

Each recommendation must name at least one proponent. IGs must ensure that the 

proponent identified in the recommendation is the correct one to fix the problem. If the 

recommended solution concerns a particular standard or regulation, the IG should 

determine what person or staff agency is the proponent for that standard or regulation. 

2. Out-Briefing the Proponent: Before the commander sees the results of the 

inspection, the IG team must extend a professional courtesy to those individuals or staff 

agencies listed to fix the variety of issues the IG team recommended. The Team Leader 

should schedule a briefing with the head of the staff agency or the person involved and 

share the findings and recommendations pertaining only to that person or staff agency. 

The slide briefing, the only physical output of this step, should cover the following areas: 

a. Inspection Background and Concept (slides on the Inspection Purpose, 

Inspection Objectives, and Inspection Concept) 

 

b. Inspection Methodology (slides on the overall Inspection Approach, Task 

Organization, and units or agencies visited) 

c. Results of a Legal Review (if a legal review was requested) 

d. Findings by Objective and Sub-Task with Recommendations (one slide for 

each finding listing the Inspection Objective, Sub-Task, Finding Statement, and 

Recommendation) [Note: Show only those slides pertaining to the proponent you are 

briefing.] 

If a face-to-face briefing is not possible, then a telephone call to the proponent that 

covers all of this information is acceptable. 

3. The Purpose of the Briefing: The purpose of the briefing is to inform the proponent 

about the recommendations you will make to the commander which -- once approved -- 

will require that proponent to take corrective action. The briefing is an information 

briefing only and does not require the concurrence of the proponent. Once all proponent 

out-briefings are complete, the IG inspection team is ready to transition to the 

Completion Phase of the Inspections Process and out-brief the commander. 

6-23
The Inspector General Program Intelligence Oversight Guide August 2009 

6-24

Figure 6-7 shows the steps with the associated completed items. 

 Joint IG Inspections Process E x e c u tio n

Step 7

Visit 

Commands

Section 6-1

Step 8

In Process 

Review (IPR)

Section 6-2

Step 9

Update the 

Commander

Section 6-3

Step 10

Analyze 

Results and 

Crosswalk

Section 6-4

Step 11

Out Brief 

Proponent

Section 6-5

IG Inspection Progress 

Step 7 Step 8 Step 9 Step 10 Step 11 

Trip Report Trends 

Analysis 

Update 

Briefing 

Draft Final 

Report 

Inspection 

Results 

Briefing 

Unit(s) Out 

Briefing 

Figure 6-7 

Execution Phase and Outputs