Intelligence Community Programs, Management, and Enduring Issues (CRS Report for Congress)
Premium Purchase PDF for $24.95 (74 pages)
add to cart or
subscribe for unlimited access
Pro Premium subscribers have free access to our full library of CRS reports.
Subscribe today, or
request a demo to learn more.
| Release Date |
Nov. 8, 2016 |
| Report Number |
R44681 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
Anne Daugherty Miles, Analyst in Intelligence and National Security Policy |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
Summary:
Congress’s and the American public’s ability to oversee and understand how intelligence dollars
are spent is limited by the secrecy that surrounds the intelligence budget process. Yet, total
spending on the Intelligence Community (IC) programs discussed in this report equates to
approximately $70 billion dollars—roughly 10% of national defense spending. This report is
designed to shed light on the IC budget—in terms of its programs, management, and enduring
issues—using unclassified materials available in the public domain.
This report focuses those IC programs, grouped, for the most part, under two labels: (1) the
National Intelligence Program (NIP), and (2) the Military Intelligence Program (MIP).
Nevertheless, the combined NIP and MIP budgets do not encompass the total of U.S. intelligencerelated
spending. Intelligence-related programs that are not part of the IC include, for example,
the large Office of Intelligence within the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS’s)
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division. The ICE Office of Intelligence is not
included in the IC because, theoretically, ICE activities primarily support the DHS mission to
protect the homeland.
This report explains the management structure for the NIP and MIP to include their two separate
budget processes and the roles of the Director of National Intelligence and the Under Secretary of
Defense (Intelligence). The concluding section of this report considers the ability of the U.S.
government to make the best use of its intelligence-related resources when: (1) total intelligence
spending is impossible to calculate; (2) its management and oversight is completely
decentralized; and (3) IC funding alone is largely divided into two categories (NIP and MIP)–
managed within the executive branch separately, justified to Congress separately, and overseen by
separate congressional committees.
The Appendices are designed, in a number of cases, to provide quick reference tables
summarizing the more detailed information available in the body of the report.
Appendix A provides a summary of intelligence disciplines.
Appendix B provides very brief explanations of NIP and MIP subordinate programs.
Appendix C examines two unique and relatively obscure NIP programs, the Central
Intelligence Agency’s Retirement and Disability System and the IC’s Community
Management Account.
Appendix D briefly describes a program called the Homeland Security Intelligence
Program (HSIP).
Appendix E provides a summary table of management hats. (Senior executives are often
referred to as dual-hatted, triple-hatted, and so on, when they are charged with a number
of different roles and responsibilities and associated titles.)
Appendix F provides a summary table comparing the IPPBE and PPBE budget systems.
Appendix G provides a figure illustrating the ways in which the IPPBE and PPBE are
integrated.
Appendix H provides a list of IC-related acronyms, many of which are commonly used
in this report.
For more on IC spending trends, see CRS Report R44381, Intelligence Spending: In Brief, by
Anne Daugherty Miles.
