COURSE REPORT, SPECIAL OVERSEAS ORIENTATION (SOO), ORIENTATION NO. 3, 13-14 MAY 1976

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79-01590A000200230001-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: November 17, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 12, 2000
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: May 24, 1976
• Content Type: MF

Approved For Release-2000108107 ' :-ClA-RDP?9-01590 0200230001-9
,._,.c .._ }. .-
4 MAY 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR: Director of Training
25X1A FROM
Orientation Coordinator
VIA Chief, Functional Training Division
SUBJECT Course Report, Special Overseas Orientation
(SOO), Orientation No. 3, 13-14 May 1976
1. General: This was the third running of the
Orientation, and it was attended by 80 Agency employees, in
addition to 34 spouses, a total of 114. The orientation was
conducted in lA07 Headquarters, during the period 13-14 May.
Compared to the April running (52 Agency employees, 17
spouses), this was a significant increase in attendance, and
reached the limit (and possibly even exceeded) the room
facilities provided in lA07. It is hoped that with two
runnings in June (10-11 and 24-25), the facilities will be
less crowded. As indicated in evaluation responses, the
current running received somewhat higher ratings on all
three objectives over the April orientation, indicating that
a number of changes made as a result of a 27 April meeting
of all SOO lecture and panel participants were in a positive
direction. It is the Coordinator's opinion that except for
adjusting the time frame of some presentations (notably
increasing the time for Cover, Benefits and Services, and
reducing the time for questions after the Terrorist Modus
Operandi Panel), and improving the quality of a few presen-
tations, that the current schedule is about as good a one as
can be expected, given the diverse interests and needs of a
broad spectrum of employees and spouses.
2. Composition of Class: Of the 80 employees, 27
were from DDA (the majority communications officers), 9 from
STATSPE,. DDI (mostly-, 32 from the DDO (largely case officers
being assigned overseas to diverse areas), and 12 DDS&T
(almost all OTS officers). (See Attachment A, Student
Roster.) The 34 spouses were about equally represented
among the four Directorates. In comparison with the April
orientation, the May running had a somewhat higher percentage
Approved For Release 2000/0 /O7 C A. RD.l?79-01590A000 0230001-9 Q~p 38
 Approved For Releas&2000/08107" "CT R'DP!9-O159OAQbO2OO230001-9
of DDO employees and spouses from all Directorates in
attendance. There is still some problem as to which employees
should take SOO as opposed to CTTC, as apparently the guide-
lines which were suggested at the 27 April meeting have yet
to be fully implemented among component Training Officers.
3. Class Participation: Considering the large size
of the class and. t e number of spouses attending, class
participation was excellent. It was very apparent that the
time allotted for the Cover, Benefits and Services talks
were inadequate due to the number of questions which were
asked. The time allotted for the question period following
the panel on Terrorist Modus Operandi probably was excessive
(based on evaluation comments), and in the next running, it
is suggested that this time be reduced to allow more time
for the Cover, Benefits and Services. talks. The separate
two panels at the end of the second day, one for spouses,
the other for Agency employees, generated many questions,
but probably suffered from a lack of direction. As will be
noted in the attached evaluations, many trainees seem to
expect precise answers for their particular situation over-
seas, an objective which is obviously beyond the scope of a
general orientation.
4. Orientation Evaluations: As indicated previously,
evaluations o t e current running were an improvement over
the April orientation. On a rating scale from 1-5, with (1)
being unsatisfactory, and (5) outstanding, there were no (1)
ratings, fewer (2) ratings, and generally a higher percentage
of (4) ratings in the current running, with the most signifi-
cant improvement being in the third objective. (See Attachment
B, Evaluation.) A new critique form was devised for the
current running, in possible preparation for computer evalua-
tion, requesting an evaluation on each presentation. Although
the results of this evaluation have not been separately
tabulated, they provide a quick indication as to how well
(or conversely, how poorly) each presentation was received
by individual class members. The evaluation format was also
revised to allow trainees to comment on areas for possible
improvement, shortcomings, the advisability of including the
orientation in a one-week training package, and whether the
orientation had any significant impact on a pending overseas
assignment. As might be expected, a wide range of responses
were obtained, some of value, and others questionable, which
have been summarized in Attachment B. Perhaps of significance
is the response to question 4, "Has the Orientation changed
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 x ClA-R Q159OA000200230001-9
 25X1 C
Approved For Release-2000/08/07?;
~R- 7 0159OAi 00200230001-9
.. .F_+ 6 aen
your views or attitude in any significant way about your
overseas assignment?", which was quite positive in that
practically none of the class members found the Orientation
intimidating, with the vast majority finding it beneficial.
One major problem in coordinating an orientation
which has speakers from different Directorates is in obtaining
consistency in presentations. Although considerable improve-
ment was noted in this running in eliminating complaints of
redundancy, the problem has by no means been solved, nor is
it likely to be. There were also complaints that some
speakers were not adhering to a consistent olic and that
it was not altogether clear what policy was
on how an employee should conduct himself herself should
they become a victim of a hostage situation. Added to the
above, scheduled speakers continued to be changed with
little prior notice, allowing for little preparation or
prior briefing. These are problems inherent in this type of
orientation, and it is doubtful that much, if anything, can
be done to substantially ameliorate them.
5. Changes in Present Running and Proposed Changes
in June Runnings: The major changes in the May running from
the April Orientation were: (a) reducing the time for the
Nature of the Terrorist Threat; (b) moving up the presen-
tation on Dealing with Terrorists and Terrorism from the
second day to the first, to follow the film, "Kidnap Executive
Style;" (c) adding a separate short lecture on the Bomb
Threat Cover, CCS, and Benefits and Services; (d) eliminating
a separate discussion on case histories which were available
as reading handouts; (e) including a film on "Defensive
Driving;" (f) holding a separate panel at the end of the
second day for spouses, and another for Agency employees;
and (g) making both the first and second day sessions open
to spouses. (See Attachment C, Orientation Schedule.) In
the main, these changes were well received, notwithstanding
some trainee criticism of a need for more time and improve-
ment in quality in a number of presentations previously
referred to. In this regard, it might be noted that with
such subjects as benefits, cover, and policy, which have to
be handled with considerable skill because of the many
extenuating circumstances involved, it may not be desirable
to go into too much detail notwithstanding trainee critiques.
Approved For Release 2000/08/07
W-D R. 1590A000200230001-9
 Approved For Release 2000/ / ','A= D 79-0159MOO0200230001-9
The following changes are suggested for the June runnings:
a. Reduce the time of the Modus Operandi Discussion
and Question Period from 50 minutes to 30.
b. Allow 10 more minutes to both the Cover, Benefits
and Services presentations. (The Benefits and
Services talk could benefit from visual aids which
will be suggested to the speaker. Actually, in
the time allotted, the speaker handled questions
very effectively, a factor which was not reflected
in the comments on his presentation.)
c. Retain the Track I and Track II as separate panels
(as is), but attempt to structure them better.
25X1A (The Track I panel actually went very well, but as
noted by after the session, present
policy on standards of conduct expected of Agency
employees in hostage situations is at best mirky,
and is in need of clarification, which
hopes to obtain from higher Agency authorities.
The Track II Panel, requires a senior, knowledgeable,
and preferably female employee to chair the session,
)
und
f
b
.
o
e
which up to this point has yet Ito
25X1A
25X1A
Atts
Att
A:
Student Roster
Att
B:
Evaluation
Att
C:
Orientation Schedule
Approved For Release 2000/08/07 `CIAr=RDA9 590A000200230001-9
 Appro e &a ~ 00230001-9
UNCLASSIFIED CONFIDENTIAL SECRET
25X1A
Appro
ed For Release 2000/0 deal
OFFICIAL ROUTING SLIP
I
TO
NAME AND ADDRESS
DATE
INIT
2
3
4
5
6
ACTION
DIRECT REPLY
PREPARE REPLY
APPROVAL
DISPATCH
RECOMMENDATION
COMMENT
FILE
RETURN
CONCURRENCE
INFORMATION
SIGNATURE
Remarks : Gvz~~
f/ ~.a3"BUJ `
FOLD HERE TO RETURN TO SENDER
FROM: NAME. ADDRESS AND PHONE NO.
TE
-01
5j
UNCLASSIFIED CONFIDENTIAL
CRET
00230001-9
 INTERNAL CONFI"C 1TIAL ^ SECRET
u CkASSiF~ D Q,A __QNJI,... P% A
OUTING AND RECORD 5
25X1
r Orie
eas
FROM:
TO: (Officer designation, room number, and
building)
OFFICER'S
INITIALS
1 C/0T-B
6D57 Hqa.
3.
C/FTD
816 C of c
COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom
to wham. Draw a line across column after each comment.)
25X1A
_. --'- i d /o 7,-e
1016 cof c
12. C/OTB
6D57 Hqs.
//-~.D
14.
Orientation Coordinator
816CofC
1976
ntation (SOO) - 11-14 May
FORM 610 "SEOTIONSUS ^ SECRET vvvQoi CONF D USE ONLY = DdLASSIFIED
3-62