JP 3-60, page 117

The Targeting Assessment Process D-9 target elements means an assessment cell can provide an estimate of success refined with the latest available information. As more definitive data becomes available, the assessment becomes less of an estimate and more of an actual assessment of what was or was not achieved. (1) The overall goal of this approach is to provide the JFC with the best estimated assessment of the progress of the joint operation at any given time, using all information available at that time. For lethal strikes, this means using assessed effects where BDA is available. It then predicts the effects for strikes where BDA is not yet available. Such predictions should be based on historical data on strike performance and analyses of likely success given the specific planned weapon/target pairings (e.g., JMEM data). Finally, assessors should continuously refine effects predictions based on the success of intermediate steps in the execution chain. This means, even where final BDA is not available for a given strike, assessors should update the prediction of likely strike success as soon as it is known whether the planned task was actually performed, update again as soon as it is known whether the weapon successfully released or launched, and update again as soon as it is known whether the weapon successfully guided to or engaged the target. (2) A key aspect of this approach is that it suggests a need for a smooth transition between assessing a plan prior to execution, when only predictions are available, to assessing a plan in the midst of execution, when partial BDA information is available, through assessing success at the end of an operation approaching full BDA availability. Estimation can also facilitate undertaking higher level assessments of more complicated, interdependent systems. (3) Estimating higher level effects based on estimates of what happens at specific target elements has advantages and limitations. A key advantage is that, by using the approach discussed earlier, assessors will have a basis for estimating what happens at specific target elements. This estimate will be based on a combination of prediction and, when available, execution data. These estimated effects on specific target elements can then serve as the input to the model of the target system in estimating system level effects. A key limitation is that the fidelity of the estimate diminishes the further one gets from the initial, direct effects of the action or task accomplishment. 3. Assessment Metrics and Measurements a. Assessment Metrics. The staff should develop metrics to determine if operations are properly linked to the JFC’s overall strategy and the larger hierarchy of operational and national objectives. These metrics evaluate the results achieved during joint operations. During target development, personnel should develop metrics for each specific target. These metrics should indicate the intended effects(s) on the target as a result of actions(s) against it. Example: Destruction of Critical Node 1 will degrade Target A by at least 50 percent. These metrics may be refined during the weaponeering process, as the choice of weapons, fuzes, and delivery tactics may further influence effects. These metrics should be posted in an ETF or provided in another format to the assessment team prior to post-strike assessment, so they can measure the intended performance against the target. Metrics can either be objective (using sensors or personnel to directly observe damage inflicted) or subjective (using indirect