Dropdown items
My Academies

Personal Library

Account settings

Chemical Terrorism: Assessment of U.S. Strategies in the Era of Great Power Competition (2024)

Chapter: Appendix D: Strategy Assessment Rubric

Visit NAP.edu/10766 to get more information about this book, to buy it in print, or to download it as a free PDF.

Previous chapter Next chapter
Page of 196
Search this publication

Previous Chapter: Appendix C: Committee Biographies

Page 177 Cite Bookmark

Suggested Citation: "Appendix D: Strategy Assessment Rubric." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024. Chemical Terrorism: Assessment of U.S. Strategies in the Era of Great Power Competition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/27159.

Appendix D

Strategy Assessment Rubric

The following rubric was applied by the committee in their evaluation of the following areas: Identify, Prevent/Counter, and Response. The major categories examined were A, B, and C, which evaluate the existence of a genuine strategy, the sufficiency of a strategy to meet the chemical threat over a required time frame, and the feasibility of the strategy, respectively. The subcategories (A1-A3, B1 and B2, and C1-C3) consider different criteria as shown in the table.

Category	Subcategory	Criteria
A A genuine strategy exists	A1	(1) above exists [minimum 1 goal + definition of success].
	A2	For each goal in (1) above, there is at least one (2) above.
	A3	(1) and (2) are COHERENT (i.e., explicit and mutually consistent).
B The strategy is sufficient to meet the threat over the required timeframe of interest	B1	The goal(s) collectively encompass [identifying/preventing/countering/responding to/recovering from] the level and type of threat likely to emerge in the timeframe.
	B2	The policies, plans, and resource allocations are sufficient to achieve the goal(s) (or directly the level of threat likely to emerge in the timeframe).
	C1	All the elements of the strategy, which are required to fulfill (B) above are also legally feasible.
C The strategy is feasible	C2	All the elements of the strategy, which are required to fulfill (B) above are also fiscally feasible.
C The strategy is feasible	C3	All the elements of the strategy, which are required to fulfill (B) above are also politically feasible.

Legend

1. = Well-defined goal(s), including a definition of “success.”

2. = A set of policies, plans, and resource allocations designed to meet the corresponding goal(s) [minimum 1 plan/policy/resource allocation for each goal].

Page 178 Cite Bookmark

Steps to Take

1. Define or describe what “Success” looks like.

2. Use all evidence gathered to rate component A1.

Rating Scale A1	Criteria
Inadequate	There is no evidence that the United States possesses even one key goal aimed at the above categories.
Partially Inadequate	There is some, but only partial, evidence that the United States possesses at least one key goal aimed at the above categories of chemical terrorism.
Partially Adequate	There is evidence that the United States possesses at least one key goal aimed at the above categories, but there is not a clear definition of success associated with it.
Adequate	There is evidence that the United States possesses at least one key goal aimed at the above categories and there is a clear definition of success.

List all the identified goals of the strategy (goals are listed as a, b, c, d, etc.).

Rate Components A2a, A2b, A2c, etc.

Rating Scale A2a	Definition
Inadequate	There is no evidence that the United States has any policies, plans, or resource allocations to address Goal a.
Partially Adequate	There is some, but only partial, evidence that the United States has policies, plans, and/or resource allocations specifically designed to address Goal a.
Adequate	There is evidence that the United States has policies, plans, and/or resource allocations specifically designed to address Goal a.

Apply this exercise to the rest of the goals: A2b, A2c, A2d, etc.

Rate A2 Overall.

Rating Scale A2 Overall	Criteria
Inadequate	A2a, A2b, etc. are all “Inadequate.” There are no policies, plans, or resource allocations for any of the strategy’s goals.
Partially Inadequate	At least one of A2a, A2b, etc. is “Inadequate.” At least one of the strategy’s goals lacks corresponding policies, plans, and resource allocations (unless another strategy includes the same goal and is judged as “Adequate” above).
Partially Adequate	At least one of A2a, A2b, etc. is “Partially Adequate.” There is only partial evidence that at least one of the strategy’s goals possesses corresponding policies, plans and/or resource allocations (unless another strategy includes the same goal and is judged as “Adequate” above).
Adequate	All of A2a, A2b, etc. are “Adequate.” All of the strategy’s goals have policies, plans, and/or resource allocations specifically designed to address them.

Page 179 Cite Bookmark

Use all evidence to rate component A3.

Rating Scale: A3	Criteria
Inadequate	There are major internal contradictions between goals and/or policies in the strategy
Partially Inadequate	There are some internal contradictions between goals and/or policies, but these are relatively minor in the judgment of the committee.
Partially Adequate	All of the goals and policies, plans, and resource allocations in the strategy are internally consistent but not all have been explicitly documented.
Adequate	All of the goals and policies, plans, and resource allocations in the strategy are both explicitly documented and internally consistent with one another.

Combine components to rate Adequacy of “A “Overall.

Rating Scale:	Criteria
Combined A
Inadequate	If any of A1, A2 or A3 is rated “Inadequate.”
Partially Inadequate	If all of A1, A2, or A3 are rated at least as “Partially Inadequate,” but not all are “Partially Adequate” or “Adequate.”
Partially Adequate	If all of A1, A2, and A3 are rated at least as “Partially Adequate,” but not all are “Adequate.”
Adequate	If all of A1, A2, and A3 are rated as “Adequate.”

Use all evidence rate component B1.

Rating Scale: B1	Criteria
Inadequate	The goal(s) collectively do not encompass one of the above category threats likely to emerge in the timeframe.
Partially Inadequate	The goal(s) collectively at least partially encompass the above category either the level or the type of threat likely to emerge in the timeframe, but not both.
Partially Adequate	The goal(s) collectively partially encompass the above category at the level and type of threat likely to emerge in the timeframe.
Adequate	The goal(s) collectively encompass the above category at least the level and type of threat likely to emerge in the timeframe.
Exceed	The goal(s) collectively encompass the above category at the level and type of threat likely to emerge in the timeframe, and even beyond this level and/or nature of threat.

Page 180 Cite Bookmark

Use all evidence to rate B2 for each goal, B2a, B2c, B2d, etc.

Rating Scale: B2a	Definition
Inadequate	Existing policies, plans, and resource allocations taken together are insufficient to achieve Goal a (and by extension the level of threat likely to emerge in the timeframe).
Partially Adequate	Existing policies, plans, and resource allocations taken together are possibly, but not certainly, sufficient to achieve Goal a (and by extension the level of threat likely to emerge in the timeframe).
Adequate	Existing policies, plans, and resource allocations taken together are clearly sufficient to achieve Goal a (and by extension the level of threat likely to emerge in the timeframe).
Exceed	Existing policies, plans, and resource allocations taken together exceed what is necessary to achieve Goal a (and by extension the level of threat likely to emerge in the timeframe).

Apply this exercise to the rest of the goals: B2b, B2c, B2d, etc.

Rate B2 Overall.

Rating Scale: B2 Overall	Criteria
Inadequate	B2a, B2b, etc. are all “Inadequate.” There are no policies, plans, or resource allocations for any of the strategy’s goals.
Partially Adequate	All of B2a, B2b, B2c, etc. are rated at least as “Partially Adequate” unless the goal(s) that are labeled “Partially Adequate” are covered by other equivalent goals in other strategy documents which themselves are rated “Adequate.”
Adequate	All of B2a, B2b, B2c, etc. are rated at least as “Adequate.”
Exceed	All of B2a, B2b, B2c, etc. are rated at least as “Adequate” and one or more or rated as “Exceed.”

Combine components to rate Adequacy of “B “Overall.

Rating Scale: B Overall	Criteria
Inadequate	If any of B1 or B2 is rated “Inadequate.”
Partially Inadequate	If at least one of B1 or B2 is rated as “Partially Inadequate,” but neither is rated as “Inadequate.”
Partially Adequate	At least one of B1 or B2 is rated “Partially Adequate,” while neither is rated lower.
Adequate	If B1 AND B2 are rated as “Adequate.”
Exceed	If B1 AND B2 are rated at least as “Adequate,” and at least B1 or B2 are rated as “Exceed.”

Page 181 Cite Bookmark

Use all evidence to rate components C1, C2, and C3.

Rating C1.

Rating Scale: C1 Overall	Criteria
Inadequate	At least one element of the strategy required to fulfill (B) above (i.e., necessary to address the threat) is likely to not be legally feasible.
Partially Adequate	There is some doubt whether all the elements of the strategy, which are required to fulfill (B) above (i.e., necessary to address the threat) are legally feasible.
Adequate	All the elements of the strategy that are required to fulfill (B) above (i.e., necessary to address the threat) are also legally feasible.

Rating C2.

Rating Scale: C2	Criteria
Inadequate	At least one element of the strategy required to fulfill (B) above (i.e., necessary to address the threat) is likely to not be fiscally feasible.
Partially Adequate	There is some doubt whether all the elements of the strategy, which are required to fulfill (B) above (i.e., necessary to address the threat) are fiscally feasible.
Adequate	All the elements of the strategy that are required to fulfill (B) above (i.e., necessary to address the threat) are also fiscally feasible.

Rating C3.

Rating Scale: C3	Criteria
Inadequate	At least one element of the strategy required to fulfill (B) above (i.e., necessary to address the threat) is likely to not be politically feasible.
Partially Adequate	There is some doubt whether all the elements of the strategy, which are required to fulfill (B) above (i.e., necessary to address the threat) are politically feasible.
Adequate	All the elements of the strategy that are required to fulfill (B) above (i.e., necessary to address the threat) are also politically feasible.

Combine components to Rate Overall Adequacy of C.

Rating Scale: C Overall	Criteria
Inadequate	At least one of C1, C2, or C3 is rated as “Inadequate.”
Partially Adequate	At least one of C1, C2, or C3 is rated as “Partially Adequate,” but none are rated as “Inadequate.”
Adequate	C1, C2, and C3 are rated as “Adequate.”

Page 182 Cite Bookmark

Combine A, B, and C to Yield Final Adequacy Rating.

Rating Scale: Final Adequacy	Criteria
Inadequate	Either A, B, or C are rated as “Inadequate.”
Partially Inadequate	A or B is rated as “Partially Inadequate,” and none of A, B, or C are rated as “Inadequate.”
Partially Adequate	A, B, and C are all rated at least as “Partially Adequate,” but not all are rated as “Adequate” or above.
Adequate	A, B, and C are all rated as “Adequate.”
Exceed	A and C are rated as “Adequate,” and B is rated as “Exceed.”

After scoring the Final Adequacy: Answer the following questions, and provide additional support from external resources like literature, briefing presentations, your expertise, congressional hearings, etc.
1. Identify
  1. What technical, policy, or resource gaps, if any, are limiting the strategy from being used to adequately identify international chemical threats? national chemical threats? Critical emerging threats?
2. Prevent/Counter
  1. What technical, policy, or resource gaps, if any, are limiting the strategy from being used to adequately prevent nonstate actors from acquiring or misusing the technologies, materials, and critical expertise needed to carry out chemical attacks (including dual-use technologies, materials, and expertise? State-sponsored actors?
  2. What technical, policy, or resource gaps, if any, are limiting the strategy from being used to adequately counter efforts by nonstate actors to carry out such chemical attacks? State-sponsored actors?
3. Response
  1. What technical, policy, or resource gaps, if any, are limiting the strategy from being used to adequately respond to chemical terrorism incidents to attribute their origin and to help manage their consequence?