THE SUPPORT SERVICES HISTORICAL SERIES - AGENCY TRAINING AUGUST 1949 - JULY 1951

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP93-00791R000100070001-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 100
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 12, 2006
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: July 1, 1970
• Content Type: REPORT

CIA HISTORICAL STAFF
Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
The Support Services
Historical Series
AGENCY TRAINING
AUGUST 1949 - JULY 1951
SECRET
CIA Internal Use Only
Access Controlled by
the Directorate of
Support
SECRET
OTR 4
July 1970
Copy 1 of 3
 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
WARNING
This document contains information affecting the national
defense of the United States, within the meaning of Title
18, sections 793 and 794, of the US Code, as amended.
Its transmission or revelation of its contents to or re-
ceipt by an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.
GROUP 1
Excluded from automatic
downgrading and declassification
 1
Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
SECRET
CIA Internal Use Only
Access Controlled by the Directorate of Support
THE DDS HISTORICAL SERIES
AGENCY TRAINING
AUGUST 1949 - JULY 1951
H~gft T. unning
Di ector of Train'ng
HISTORICAL STAFF
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
SECRET
 . Approved For Release 2006104t12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
Foreword
In the development of training in the Central Intelligence Agency,
> the period from October of 1949 to July of 1951 was a period of transi-
tion, a period during which training practice and doctrine inherited
from the Office of Strategic Services developed and changed and became
responsive to the distinctive needs of CIA. From the beginning of CIA
in 1947 until the Agency's second birthday in 1949, the OSS training
patterns, both conceptual and organizational, continued. The brief
passage through the interim Central Intelligence Group had left them
unchanged, and it was not until CIA had established an identity and
character of its own that the old patterns could be altered to meet the
new needs.
The inheritance from OSS was, of course, entirely operational in
orientation -- training related to clandestine activities; the people who
directed and conducted the training were part of the inheritance and
were themselves operational in orientation. It was only natural, then,
that until the Agency developed its own training policy and identified
the need for a broader spectrum of training, the operational orientation
1
Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/04112StlAL,
F33-00791 R0001 00070001-3
continued, and the training staffs continued to be components of the
clandestine services. It was not until July of 1951, when all Agency
training activities were consolidated within the Office of Training
under the command of the Director of Training, that the period of
transition was completed.
Preceding this period of transition, there was a period of transfer,
'the period during which OSS training concepts and disciplines were
transferred from OSS, through CIG, to CIA. That period is described
in detail in SS Historical Paper No. OTR-2, History of the Office of
Training, 1945 - 1949. The present paper picks up the narrative of
Agency training development where that paper ends.
Perhaps it should be noted at this point that the segmentation of
the history of an institutional activity -- like that of the history of an
empire, of a nation, or of a great religious or cultural movement is often determined not alone on the basis of developmental phases but
also on the basis of leadership. Thus we find that identified with each
of the developmental phases of training in the Agency there is a man,
or a group of men, who gave direction to events and character to
 Approved For Release 2006/04/12
T i -00791 R000100070001-3
achievements. The period covered by this paper, then, is not only
one of transition; it is also one during which a small group of men led
helped to shape the future of Agency training.
 Approved For Release 2006/0411 IA i-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
~ 4 r T
Contents
Page
Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
1. Development of the Training Division . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
B. Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1. Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Budget . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . 3
3. Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Training Liaison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
C. Training Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Mission and Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2. Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3. Doctrine . . . . . . . . . . ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
D. Overseas Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
E. The Director of Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
II. The Expansion of the Training Division . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
A. Organizational Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
B. Staffing Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
C'r l,L~
Approved For Release 2006/A~Z: ~IA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 1
rgCP93-007918000100070001-3
Approved For Release 2006/041
8
Page
C. The Rotation Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
D. Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
E. New Courses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45
III. Special Problems in Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
A. Auditors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
B. Outside Lectures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
C. The Pool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
E. Improvement of Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
................... 65
A. Area Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
25X1 B. The Area Training Branch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -67
1. Establishment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
68
2. The Classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . .
- 69
3. Problems on the Post . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.` . .
70
4. Field-Headquarters Relationships . . . . . .
. . .
72
5. Problems with Trainees . . . . . . . . . . .
. . .
74
D.
Mobilization Training Program . . . . . . . . . .
. . .
76
S[CRE
 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : S'I, -C[ 93-00791 R000100070001-3
~Vw
Page
f 5X1
V. Summary and Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
A. Temper of the Times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
B.. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
1. Development of TRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
2. Expansion of TRD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
3. Special Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
G. Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Appendixes
A. Identification of Positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Approved For Release 2006/04/12 CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 SC~I~.-R;D,F93-00791 R000100070001-3
I
Page
Remarks to Training Review Committee . . . 113
Index to Persons Mentioned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
 Approved For Release 2006I04Q'1 E~~ OR \ L ! P93-00791 R000100070001-3
AGENCY TRAINING, OCTOBER 1949 - JULY 1951
Chapter I
Development of the Training Division
'5X1
A. Background
On 5 August 1949,
was appointed
Chief of the Training Staff of the Office of Special Operations (O5O).'`
On 14 September of that year, by agreement between OSO and the Office
of Policy Coordination (OPC),
was formally named Chief
of OPC training and thus the training elements of the two operational
Offices were combined. On 17 October, the Deputy Assistant Director
of OSO addressed a memorandum tol
las "Chief of the Train-
ing Division, OSO/OPC. " Thereafter the unit that
was referred to officially as TRD -- organizationally attached to OSO
but serving the training needs of both OSO and OPC. From that time
left the Agency to return to the Army, in April of 1951,
his task was to consolidate the existing training activities of OSO and
OPC and to develop new programs to meet the operational needs of the
Agency. The problem of first priority was that of establishing the kind
of administrative framework within which TRD could function most
effectively.
5 August 1949, SECRET
September 1949, SECRET
SECRET
 Approved For Release 2006/04/1 23ATP 93-00791 R000100070001-3
B. Administration
The problem of TRD administrative relationships was a natural
consequence of the merging of two units which, although devoted to a
common mission, had different origins, different loyalties, and dif-
ferent objectives. Inherent in the situation were problems of command
channels, financial management, personnel actions, and liaison activi-
I
1. Command. Before the formal merger of the OSO and OPC
training units, the skeletal training branch of OPC had relied upon OSO
facilities for many of its training requirements, and coordination had
been achieved through a Joint Training Committee made up of repre-
sentatives from OSO and OPC. When TRD was created, a decision con-_
cerning a single command channel had not yet been made, and the
Joint Training Committee -- at that time composed of the Chief of
TRD, the Executive Officer of OSO, and the Chief of Support of OPC --
continued to provide command guidance. For organizational conven-
ience, TRD was considered a component of OSO. In a memorandum
dated 16 December 1949, addressed to the CIA Management Officer,
the Executive Officer of the Agency stated that the Director of Central
Intelligence wished to delay action on the determination of a single
 Approved For Release 2006/0
1-2:- ` l -YDP93-007918000100070001-3
SLU
command channel for TRD until the National Security Council had
made a decision regarding an amalgamation of OSO and OPC. The
memorandum further stated that the "current combined committee-
type of control" was temporarily authorized, with TRD being responsi-
ble to both the Assistant Director for Special Operations (AD/SO) and
the Assistant Director for Policy Coordination (AD/PC).
The Joint Training Committee, then, continued to control
the activities of TRD; :and TRD continued to be charted as a component
of OSO. The OPC personnel serving as members of TRD were con-
sidered to be in an on-loan status. This "temporary" command struc-
ture made it possible for TRD to function as a training unit serving the
needs of both OSO and OPC, but it created a number of sticky adminis-
trative problems, the most difficult of which was the structure and
management of the TRD budget.
2. Budget. When TRD was established, in October of 1949, it
was decided by the Joint Training Committee that budgetary matters
would continue to be handled on an ad hoc basis -- as they had been since
17 September -- until command channels had been established. The
December 1949 decision of the DCI to defer determination of com-
mand channels made it necessary for the Committee to face the
SL_ t,L
 Approved For Release 2006/01(1,2; 1A, RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
1
budgetary problem and try to find a solution. In a meeting on 4
January of 1950, the Committee did face the problem and considered
possible solutions. None of the alternatives, however, appeared to be
workable, and the Committee decided to continue the ad hoc approach.
In February of 1950 the OSO funds available for training
appeared to be running out, and in March the Committee met with the
finance officers of OSO and OPC to work out a course of action. In
that meeting it was agreed that when OSO training funds were completely
spent, OPC would provide -- from existing accounts -- the money to sup-
port TRD activities for the rest of the 1950 fiscal year. At this
time, the Committee, with the concurrence of the OSO and OPC finance
officers, recommended that the two Offices contribute equally to the
TRD budget for the 1951 fiscal year. This recommendation was never
officially approved, but it became the basis for continuation of the ad
hoc approach to TRD budget problems, an approach that kept TRD in
business until it found a secure budgetary home in the Office of Train-
ing in July of 1951.
3. Personnel. The lack of clearly defined command channels
during the 1949-51 period made personnel actions just as hard to handle
 Approved For Release 2006/04IS t3ii 4E bP93-00791 R000100070001-3
as budgetary matters. The Chief of TRD was responsible for the ad-
ministrative supervision of all personnel in the Division, but control
of the table of organization, position classification, and candidate
qualifications was exercised by the Office of Personnel.; and personnel
actions proposed by the Chief of TRD had to be approved and authorized
by either the Executive Officer of OSO or the Chief of Staff II of OPC,
depending upon the parent Office of the person involved in the action.
In effect, then, the Chief of TRD carried the responsibility for per-
sonnel administration in the Division but had no authority to make
decisions.
In January of 1950, the Joint Training Committee worked
out an agreement with OSO and OPC whereby all promotion actions
for people assigned to TRD were to be approved by the Committee,
and all travel requests and travel vouchers were to be approved by
the Executive Officer of OSO only -- regardless of the parent Office
of the person affected. This arrangement proved to be workable, and
at least one of the administrative problems of the Chief of TRD was
solved.
I
SECRET
 Approved For Release 200e j I1 i 1CJA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
4. Training Liaison. As early as 1948 the Training Staff of
1
I
OSO had established liaison with the other units of OSO through Train-
ing Liaison Officers (TLO's), officers who, in addition to their major
duties with their units, served as points of contact on training matters.
These TLO's met frequently with members of the Training Staff for
discussion of mutual problems. As the OPC Training Branch began
to develop, late in 1948, it became apparent that a similar TLO
arrangement was needed in OPC; but it was not until August of 1949
that an effort was made to establish systematic procedures for desig-
nating OPC TLO's. The minutes of the 3 August meeting of the Joint
Training Committee record the recommendation that OPC designate
operations and planning officers to act as TLO's.
Apparently implementation of the recommendation was slow
in coming. On 4 October of 1949, after
Chief of both OSO and OPC training, OPC had not yet come up with a
list of operations and planning officers who would serve as TLO's..
The minutes of the Committee meeting held on that date record that
the list would be forthcoming soon. Those minutes also record that
I
ing procedures and recommended that at the next meeting of TLO's
stressed the urgent need for orienting all TLO's to train-
 Approved For Release 2006/04/6I~?t-L C~P93-007918000100070001-3
c 1
with TRD officers, Division Chiefs of both OSO and OPC be present.
There is evidence, however, that the TLO problem was slow in so-
lution.
At a meeting of all TLO's on 10 February 1950,
1 -1
distributed a "Training Liaison Officers Guide, " outlining general
procedures to be followed, delineating TLO functions, and describing
the activities of TRD. Apparently the Guide failed to accomplish its
mission, at least in OPC, for in May of 1950
long memorandum describing procedures for handling OPC students
in training. This was followed, on 1 July, by a revised TLO's Guide
and by another memorandum explaining in greater detail the proper
procedures for enrolling OPC personnel in training courses and fol-
lowing them through to the completion of the training. It appears
that a part of the problem with OPC personnel in training was the
frequent use of pseudonyms and aliases, which created almost endless
confusion; other factors -- as
pointed out to his staff - -
were lack of planning for OPC training and failure of the TLO's to
study the various guides that had been prepared for them.
At a meeting of the Joint Training Committee in December
of 1950, the TLO problem was being discussed, and Mr. William
 Approved For Release 2006/04C}A{~21p'P93-00791 R000100070001-3
01-
that a partial solution of the problem might be the appointment of a
full-time TLO in each of the Offices. agreed with the
idea and went ahead with the paper work necessary to implement it.
In February of 1951,
who had been in agent training
since OSS days, was appointed OSO Training Officer. Similar action
was not taken by OPC, but the appointment of
beginning of the senior training officer system that is still in effect
in the Agency=
C. Training Requirements
One of the major problems that I linherited when he be-
came Chief of TRD in October of 1949 was the identification of train-
ing requirements. Before the merger of the Training Staff of OSO
and the Training Branch of OPC, no systematic attempt had been
made to re-define the old OSS training requirements in terms of the
needs of CIA -- probably because those needs had not themselves
11
It- For identification of positions held by major OSO, OPC, and DDP
officers, see Appendix A. ;
-- the OSO representative on the Committee -- suggested
 Approved For Release 2006/041i:t~'_ ,RWP93-00791 R000100070001-3
been clearly defined. In facing the overall problem of training require-
found that concise statements of training missions
and functions depended on agreed conclusions concerning training
objectives, that training objectives could be defined only in terms of
operations doctrine, and that training requirements could be determined
only after doctrine had established objectives and objectives had clari-
fied missions and functions.
1. Mission and Function. On 25 July 1950,
the AD/SO and the AD/PC a'memorandum on "The Mission of the
Training Division. It The memorandum was a statement of the mission
and functions of TRD asi save them at the time. Approval
was not requested, and the statement of mission and functions was not
issued as an official TRD document. Actually, emoran-
dum was unofficially approved by both AD/SO and AD/PC, and sub-
sequently it was used as a major guideline in instructor training
courses.
The statement placed heavy stress on training requirements.
Indeed, the first of the functions listed b was "to ascertain
the training requirements of OSO and OPC, " and the entire text of
 Approved For Release 2000 1111 Cf -RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
the statement makes it clear that training missions and functions
remain intangible until requirements are determined. Implicit in
the statement was the conclusion that the first step in the determina-
tion of requirements was the definition of objectives -- both quantita-
tive and substantive.
2. Objectives. The TRD effort to determine realistic and spe-
cific training objectives was a continuing one. It began informally
wheni kecame Chief of TRD; it was, in effect, formalized
by the 25 July memorandum; and as late as March of 1951 the Joint
Training Committee was urging OSO and OPC to give TRD more
specific requirements. The Committee pointed out that identifying
the general needs of the operating Offices was not enough; TRD had
to have a breakdown of the training load in terms of the courses that
were given. TRD had found, for example, that it was not getting as
many students for "area" training as had been estimated; if this short-
age should continue, TRD would have to move some "area" instructors
to staff training or covert training in order to meet the demands of
The text of statement on TRD mission and functions is
given in Appen ix S.
SEC{ iET
 Approved For Release 2006/0419E 0 Fi- C P93-00791R000100070001-3
those activities.
said that TRD needed not only a specific 25X1
statement of the long-range requirements, but also a general. state-
ment forecasting the trends to be expected for various types of train-
ing. This forecast was needed immediately so that TRD could plan
properly. These needs were never really met, and consequently
TRD was drawn into preparing for requirements that never material-
ized.
On 14 November 1949, OPC had circulated throughout the
Agency a memorandum asking for comments on the effectiveness of
OPC's existing structure. The comments were for the use of a com-
mittee that had been assigned to study the organization and function of
OPC. On 15 Novembe esponded with a memorandum
that listed a number of difficulties that TRD had experienced with
OPC because of its organizational structure. He noted that the person-
nel of the Planning Division and those of the Operations Division dif-
fered widely in their understanding of training objectives. He said
that he had observed that some officers of the Planning Division did
 Approved For Release 2006/ CIAjRDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
not feel that they should take the same training courses given to the
Operations personnel. In trying to get substantive training objectives
from the two Divisions, TRD had found wide discrepancies in the
viewpoints of the planners and the operators. As a result, TRD
could not design courses that met the requirements of both Divisions.
1 :1
also noted that the planners repre-
sented certain activities and the operators represented certain areas;
in his view, this difference constituted a basic flaw in the structure
OPC also had some complaints about TRD at this time. In
December of 1949, eported to his staff that the AD/PC
felt that the Intelligence Orientation Course was too strongly weighted
in favor of OSO activities. It was then decided that some effort should
be made to revise the course to reflect a more nearly even distribu-
tion of coverage of OSO and OPC -- an example of the kind of make-
shift compromise necessitated by the lack of clearly defined objectives.
3. Doctrine. It is interesting that in none of the documents
recording TRD efforts to identify training requirements and formulate
training objectives is there a definition of the word "doctrine" or a
SEC AEI
Annrnvarl Fnr RpIPaca 700A/04117 - C.IA-RfP93-00791P000100070001-
 Approved For Release 2006/0191l2 Pd ?A bP93-00791 R000100070001-3
rxl
' 25X1
clarification of the relationship of doctrine to objectives. It must be
assumed that before the appearance of OPC there was no real need to
define either the word or the relationship. The OSS concept of
"doctrine" being operational -- the accepted and organizationally ap-
proved principles that govern methods and techniques of operational
activities -- and "objectives" being the specific training goals to pro-
vide the capabilities to apply the doctrine, had been carried over;
and the Training Staff of OSO had no major problem of defining ob-
jectives consistent with doctrine. With the advent of OPC, however,
and the merging of the OSO and OPC training units, new and different
operational activities were introduced; doctrine for them evolved
slowly, and training objectives could not be formulated in the absence
of doctrine.
ecognized this problem soon after he became
Chief of TRD, and in December of 1949 he made an organized effort
to solve it. At that time it had been decided -- there is no record of
how or by whom -- that OPC required training courses in
nnounced that each of the TRD instructors assigned to
I
SEPr-
 Approved For Release 2006/ 6kA DP93-00791 R000100070001-3
the development of one of these courses would be responsible for the
writing of a training manual for his course. Deadlines of from three
to six months -- varying with the different courses -- were set, and
the instructors were told to develop the doctrine upon which the manu-
als would be based.
By June of 1950, had concluded that TRD should
not and could not be responsible for the development of doctrine, and
in a meeting of the Joint Training Committee on 15 June he so informed
the OPC member of the Committee. It was then agreed that OPC
itself would take on the task of preparing the manuals, working from
topical outlines supplied by TRD.
Staff I of OPC was assigned the job of developing the doc-
trine and preparing the manuals. In October of 1950 the OPC member
of the Committee reported that Staff I had set March of 1951 as the
earliest possible completion date for the manuals. The major
reason for the slow progress, according to Staff I, was the extreme
difficulty in reaching agreement on doctrine. In early April of 1951
the draft of the first of the manuals - - was
submitted to TRD and was found wanting; TRD instructors felt that
it failed to identify doctrine and it needed considerable revision
SrCE,
 Approved For Release 2006/04(- -R-DP93-00791 R000100070001-3
before it could be useful in training. Progress continued to be slow,
and as late as December of 1951 TRD was finding the manuals being
prepared in OPC to be of variable usefulness. The manuals on covert 25X1
for example, were
almost useless in giving instruction in clandestine operations; they
merely presented general surveys of overt methods of operations.
use as far as the definitions and general policy were concerned.
This dragging out of the writing of manuals by OPC finally
led TRD to take the initiative in setting up a more orderly approach.
On 7 April 1951,
who had been an instructor in
TRS and TRD since 1948, submitted a memorandum to the Chief of
TRD on the subject of the development of doctrine.
position that although the responsibility of TRD in the development of
doctrine was not openly recognized in the operating Offices, the ten-
dency to depend on TRD had become increasingly apparent. He sug-
gested a priority emergency program aimed at determining and iden-
tifying the doctrinal material that was being used in training at that
time. He suggested a second emergency program aimed at putting
Ar,nrru rl Fnr Release 9nnR/(l4/19 C;IA-RflP93-00791R000l00070001-
 Approved For Release 2006/04/ CIR'-t[P93-00791 R000100070001-3
on paper the doctrinal fundamentals of each of the specialized fields
of clandestine activity. These programs as he saw then could be
carried out by small numbers of qualified people working as task
forces in TRD for three or four months. I1 also recommended a 25X1
third, long-range program aimed at the orderly and continuous review
of basic doctrine and of its relevance to operational experience; this
program would require an adequately staffed and supported "doctrine
development" group.
On 23 July 1951, (Acting Chief of TRD
[::::: -1
along the lines suggested b+:::::::] The job of the Staff was to
insure that the content of all instruction in TRD would be operationally
sound and consistent with the policies of OSO and OPC. TRD Adminis-
trative Instruction 70-3 set up a procedure for the Doctrine Develop-
ment Staff to follow in reviewing regularly all lesson plans, lecture
1 outlines, problems, and study material used in all courses.
Actually, the Doctrine Development Staff was an outgrowth
departure) set up a Doctrine Development Staff
of a committee that!
"Training Review
I had established in June of 1950 -- the
The members of this group were
 Approved For Release 2006/04I [O - P93-007918000100070001-3
Although the task assigned the Committee was a
broad one -- to review the mission, the instruction, and the existing
procedures of TRD and make recommendations for improvement --
the major problem the Committee was concerned with was the develop-
ment of doctrine. The Committee held its last meeting on 19 June
1950, and its final report was commended highly by
Although the Committee did not, as we have seen, solve the doctrinal
problems of TRD, it made a major contribution to the rapport of TRD
with both OSO and OPC. In a 30 August 1950 memorandum addressed
to the Chief of TRD, the AD/PC,
praised the work
of the Committee and commended the Chief of TRD for his proposals
of action based on the Committee's recommendations; and on 25 Octo-
AD/SO, addressed a similar memorandum to
left the Agency in April of 1951, the prob-
lems of identifying training requirements had not been completely
A summary of
mittee appears in Appendix C.
SEU
Annrnviwi Fnr RaI ca 9OOF10A/19 ? (IA-RIlP93-00791 R000100070001-
 Approved For Release 2006/041 41~".R.~P93-00791 R000100070001-3
I
I
solved, but measurable progress had been made. The need for de-
fined operational doctrine as a necessary basis for training objectives
had been clearly established, missions and functions of TRD had
been clarified and specified, and training requirements could be
identified with some assurance that they would be responsive to the
needs of the operating Offices.
D. Overseas Training
Closely related to the problem of identifying OSO and OPC train-
ing requirements at Headquarters was the problem of TRD support
for Agency training activities overseas. During World War II, the
OSS Training Unit had had no direct responsibility for the content of
the training given in overseas areas, but it did support those activi-
ties by training instructors and providing training materials. When
CIA was created' in 1947, this relationship was easily transferred to
the Training Staff of OSO, along with other OSS practices and pro-
cedures, and no major problem developed until OPC was formed on
1 September of 1948. OPC initiated a number of projects that involved
the training
In the early
stages, these projects were supported by the Training Branch of OPC;
Aooroved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/3/11 :IgLA-~ZDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
a part of the problem only, and in November of 1950
and when the OSO and OPC training units were merged in September
of 1949, TRD became responsible for the support of OPC overseas
training activities as well as those of OSO.
As these overseas training programs developed, it became ap=
parent that TRD could not give them adequate support by treating
them as peripheral activities. By August of 1950 the requirement for
sending training materials to overseas activities had grown to the
point where it was necessary for the Joint Training Committee to
establish an Overseas Training Materials Review Committee, a three-
man group with OSO, OPC, and TRD representation. The task of
the Review Committee was to examine all training materials to be
sent overseas and ensure their appropriateness. This function solved
established a Special Projects Staff composed of four TRD instructors;
this Staff was charged with the responsibility for preparing complete
plans for all non-Headquarters training projects, both in the United
States and abroad. Such plans included cover and security arrange-
ments, the selection of safe training sites, the provision of special
training aids, and substantive course outlines. The Staff was also
Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/0 1~' (4;i
-il0 P93-00791 R000100070001-3
responsible for the coordination of the special, programs with the
operating units of OSO and OPC.
The work of the Review Committee and the Special Projects Staff
gave TRD the capability of muddling through the overseas training
problem, but it was obvious that a greater effort was needed. A 4
May 1951 report of the Review Committee, for example, stated that
the bulk of the training materials needed overseas was much too
great for the Committee to handle properly and that some of the opera-
ting units of OSO and OPC were bypassing the Review Committee and
1
independently preparing training materials for overseas use. The
report concluded with the statement that TRD needed a fully manned,
full-time unit with the responsibility for preparing and adapting train-
ing materials for overseas use. TRD did not at that time have the
personnel to assign to such a unit, and the make-shift treatment of
the overseas training problem continued until the establishment of
the Overseas Training Branch in the Office of Training in 1955.
* See SS Historical Paper No. OTR-5, History of the Office of Train-
ing, 1951-1966. SECRET.
SECUE
Annrci, rl Fnr Ralaaca 900Fln4l12 - (IA-R1)Pg;i-00791R000100070001-
 Approved For Release 2006/0+4) 2,f l DP93-00791 R000100070001-3
E. The Director of Training
On 15 November 1950., the appointment of Col. Matthew Baird as
CIA Director of Training was announced. The announcement was
transmitted to the Deputy Directors by the CIA Executive,
with an explanatory memorandum stating that Col. Baird's 25X1
staff would be a "division" of the Executive's administrative group,
that as of I January 1951 Col. Baird's "division" would begin the
development of a Career Training program, and that at a "later date"
Col. Baird would coordinate and supervise all Agency training..>~~==
Neither the document appointing Col. Baird nor the Executive's
memorandum transmitting the document clarified the relationship of
Col. Baird's "division" to TRD, and the "later date" reference in the
memorandum was ambiguous, at best. The ambiguity was partly
resolved by a 30 November 1950 memorandum from Col. Baird to
25X1 ISECRET
For a detailed discussion of the circumstances of Col. Baird's
appointment and the organizational status of his "division, " see the
CIA Historical Staff paper, Organizational History of the Central.
Intelligence Agency, 1950-1953, SECRE, Chap-
ter X, "The Conduct of Agency Business, " p. 75 ff.
25X1
Imo' 'k`
flnn.mwarl Pnr Ralaaca 7MFlnd119 ? ('IA-RnPG' -00791R000100070001-
 Approved For Release 20I P TIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
requesting a report on the functions and long-term per-
sonnel needs of. TRD. The requested report was completed and sent
to Col. Baird on 5 December. In considerable detail it described
the organization and functions of TRD and assured the Director of
Training that TRD wanted his cooperation "as regards the continued
implementation of an intimate coordination and compatibility between
it [presumably TRD] and the covert offices. Such a liaison is of
utmost importance for the maintenance of the present caliber of train-
ing for operational personnel. " The report also stated that "the train-
ing establishment must have free access to and the closest coordina-
tion and cooperation with the planning, operational, and administrative
elements of the covert offices.
On 6 December 1950, Col. Baird and met in the office
I I
discussion of problems. According to
recording the meeting, Col. Baird stated that as new Chief of Train-
ing for CIA, he had no intentions of taking over the functions of TRD
at that time and, as a matter of fact, he did not know whether he
would ever concern himself with taking over that activity. Col.
Baird also stated that his staff had been established primarily to
Annrnvarl Fnr Ralaaca 9flflRlfl4I12 ? f,IA-RrlP93-Clf791Rnnn1nnn70001-3
the Executive Officer of OSO, for a general
 Approved For Release 2006/0412 I,i,,J JP93-00791 R000100070001-3
F\\F
- plan for career management and the development of personnel; he
wanted to make it clear, however, that if he could be of any assistance:
whatever to the TRD program, he would be at the disposal of the
Chief of TRD.
Col. Baird's denial of any intent to take over the functions of
TRD re-cast the shroud of ambiguity over the "later date" reference
in the CIA Executive's memorandum of 15 November, and
was left in confusion and concern. On 13 December
wrote a memorandum to the AD/SO and the AD/PC on the status of
TRD. He said that he feared that the pending reorganization plan for
the Agency might remove TRD from the direction and control of the
two covert Offices and make it a part of CIA Administrative Services.
He felt that such a step would fail to recognize that training for OSO
and OPC was really operational support. He further felt that the
move would be detrimental to OSO and OPC in that it would reduce
the effectiveness of the training for their operations. He pointed out
that experience had demonstrated that training is more effective when
it is close to operations. He also felt that such a change would lead
to the weakening of operational security and of the overall effective-
ness of TRD because the rotation of instructors would become
 Approved For Release 2006/044 ftI1 - P93-007918000100070001-3
impracticable and thus the flow of information about current opera-
.tional techniques would be curtailed. He felt that for policy guidance
a--
and operational direction, it was imperjtive that TRD continue under
the control of OSO and OPC. 25X1
In this paper
was restating the position that had been
taken by his predecessor, l I in January of 1949
-when the OSO training unit was faced with the possibility of being
taken over by the Office of Personnel. The conviction that training
--activity was an integral part of clandestine operations was deeply
felt by the training officers who had strong ties to OSO, and they
viewed the advent of the new Director of Training with suspicion and
misgivings.
Although CIA REGULATION
dated 1 December 1950, made
it clear that the newly established Training Division had functions
different from those of TRD, and although OSO REGULATION NdI
dated 30 December 1950, referred to TRD as part of the OSO structure,
with as his deputy, there
See SS Historical Paper No. OTR-2, History of the Office of Train-
ing, 1945-1949, pp. 39-40. SECRET.
 25X1
Approved For Release 2006/0
-?r'",~-
'Al- DP93-00791 R0001 00070001-3
continued to be considerable uneasiness in TRD, OSO, and OPC
about the role of Col. Matthew Baird and its relationship to opera-
tional training. This problem was the subject of frequent discussion
in the meetings of the Joint Training Committee in January and for
some time thereafter.
On 25 January 1951, Murray McConnel, then the Deputy Director
for Administration, addressed a memorandum to the AD/SO asking
to discuss training programs freely
with Col. Baird. McConnel stated that he felt that Baird andlI
could be of great help to each other and he wanted)
know that he had the AD/SO's authority to discuss his operations. A
few days later the AD/SO,
authorized the Chief of TRD
to discuss all training programs and operations under his direction
with the Director of Training, Col. Baird.
Although confusion about Col. Baird's position had persisted for
some time, there was none in the mind of the DCI, General Walter B.
Smith. In a characteristic memorandum dated 22 March 1951 and
addressed to Mr. McConnel, the DD/A; the AD/PC;
Gen. W. G. Wyman, the AD/SO and Col. Baird, the DCI said:
* General Wyman
1951 by CIA GENE
-25-
~n 14 February
 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 ; PIA,: RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
When I established the office of the Director of Training,
it was my intention that he should plan, direct, and super-
vise the basic training for operational personnel of the
Agency. Accordingly, the function of the Assistant Direc-
tors in charge of SO and PC operations would be to establish
minimum specifications for the basic training of their per-
sonnel, to observe, correct, suggest to, and assist Col.
Baird in carrying out this service for the Agency at large.
Thus, as my representative for training, Col. Baird would
proceed to produce basically trained personnel for Agency
operations in accordance with the specifications furnished
him by the Assistant Directors concerned. I do not want the
basic training compartmented, and I see no difficulty in
handling it under centralized direction.
If you perceive serious objection, please see me personally.
The DCI's position was further clarified on 18 April 1951 with the
issuance of CIA Regulation
which transferred the Office of
Training from the DDA area to the Office of the DCI and gave Col.
Baird the authority to "Supervise all Agency training programs and
conduct.such general training programs as may be required to meet
Agency needs.
 Approved For Release 2006IOYtl rlClI-DP93-007918000100070001-3
eft the Agency in April. of 1951 to return to the
Army, and
was appointed Acting Chief of TRD.
On 23 April 1951 in a memorandum addressed to the AD/SO and the
AD/PC, Col. Baird clarified his relationship to TRD and the covert
Offices, as he understood that relationship. He said that he wished
to confirm certain procedures that would enable TRD to continue to
discharge its responsibilities in an efficient and secure manner.
These procedures were:
a. The Director of Training proposed to furnish to TRD
such staff supervision, guidance, and policy coordination as
might be necessary to insure that the desires of the DCI
were met. The DTR would give all possible assistance in
the maintenance of effective training support.
b. The AD/SO and the AD/PC would continue to pro-
vide to TRD, through the Joint Training Committee, their
training requirements, including the measures necessary
to protect the security of their operations and personnel.
c. The DTR and the Assistant Deputy Director for
Administration (Special) would join the Joint Training
Committee so that the DCI might be fully informed of the
S_c if-I
Approved For Release 2006/04/12 - CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/0~TC?4 FDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
1
1
Training Division's problems and to insure that TRD
received the Agency support that it would need.
Col. Baird actually initiated these procedures at once. The minutes
of the Joint Training Committee show that he began to attend the
Committee meetings at the end of April.
TRD had always been shown on the organization chart of OSO.
It is obvious that there had always been a strong feeling that "covert"
training should remain. under OSO, and the establishment of the office
of the Deputy Director for Plans (DD/P) did not change the belief
that the Training Division should continue to be under the control of
the covert side of the Agency. On 26 June 1951, the DD/P notified
the AD/SO and the AD/PC that TRD would be detached from OSO as
of 1 July and established under the DD/P, with
Acting Chief. This arrangement was evidently not acceptable to the
DCI, to whom Col. Baird was reporting directly. In early July the
DCI issued a directive (later issued as CIA REGULATIOI
and dated 1 July 1951) assigning "Training (Covert)" -- as TRD
By CIA GENERAL ORDEF~ dated 4 January 1951, SECRET
Mr. Allen W. Dulles was the first DD/P.
SE C ' .,r
Annrnvarl Fnr RAIAacP 9QQA/fl4/17 ? C;IA-RfPA:3-007Q1R000l00070001-
 Approved For Release 2006/0 1v `_jIA=R_fDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
was re-named -- organizationally to the Director of Training. At
25X1 the same time, SA, was designated Assistant
Director of Training (Covert), andi was
15X1
15X1
designated Assistant Director of Training (Overt). The organization
chart included in CIA REGULATIO Isbowed "Covert Training"
as a block in dotted lines under the DD/P. In a memorandum of 28
September 1951, the Executive Officer of DD/P explained this as show-
ing that although the Director of Training was responsible for directing
and coordinationg covert training in the United States, the DD/P had
retained responsibility for similar activity overseas. The DTR was
to coordinate with the DD/P on overall policies and programs and was
to provide staff supervision when requested. This information was
In effect, then, although the covert training unit was nominally
under the DTR it was still being directed by the DD/P; and as --late as
January of 1952, the Office of Training, with Col. Baird as Chief,
was still being shown on DD/P organization charts as reporting to
the DD/P. CIA NOTICEI of 13 February -
Although the information given here goes beyond the time-span of
this paper, it is provided to complete the narrative of the transfer
of TRD to the Office of Training.
-29-
Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/W_f114,FARDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
1952, however, described the organization of the Office of Training
and stated specifically that the Office was within the office of the
Director of Central Intelligence and that the Director of Training
reported to the Deputy Director of Central Intelligence. A 15 July
1952 memorandum from the DCI described the organization of the
Clandestine Services, to become effective on 1 August 1952, and
stated that a responsibility of the Director of Training was to pro-
vide to the DD/P adequate support for all clandestine activities, and
that continuous liaison between the Director of Training and the Chief
of Administration for the Deputy Director for Plans was to be main-
tained. Thereafter, a training organization did not appear on the
organization chart of the Clandestine Services.
After it was established in July of 1951 that the former TRD was
indeed under the organizational jurisdiction of the Director of Train-
ing, Col. Baird proceeded cautiously in the establishment of a rela-
tionship. Most of the people in the covert training organization did
not know him or understand his function. He was first introduced to
the Training (Covert) [TR(C)] people at a meeting of all TR(C). person-
nel on 31 October 1951, held in the auditorium of the Recreation and
 Approved For Release 2006/043ftCIIALRpP93-00791 R000100070001-3
I
Services Building. The meeting was called by
to acquaint
all Office of Training people with the developments and progress of
TR(C).
Col. Baird proceeded at once to study the organization and manage-
ment of the unwieldy component that had been added to the Office of
Training. On 11 July 1951, he addressed a memorandum to the
Deputy Director for Administration (DD/A) requesting a management
survey of what had been TRD and of the whole Office of Training. He
.asked that, in view of the organizational change that had transferred
TRD to OTR, the survey be made as soon as possible. He noted that
the transfer had raised certain administrative problems, and he
sought guidance on the organization of OTR, on the allocation of funds,
on space requirements, and on the security protection of covert opera-
tional training. On 21 July 1951, Col. Baird wrote to the Agency
Advisor for Management and stated that his primary consideration in
requesting the survey was the hope that a new plan would ensure the
utmost security protection for covert operational training, protection
that was a part of the Director of Training's responsibility for all
Agency training. He said that he felt that covert operational training
should be compartmented within OTR and be granted the autonomy of
action necessary in the interests of security.
SCC_ U
 C RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
Approved For Release 2006/0-4/12;,T_
Chapter II
The Expansion of the Training Division
25X1
Chapter I of this paper has discussed the development of TRD
within the framework of its relationships with other components of
the Agency -- primarily with OSO and OPC and finally with the com-
ponent headed by the Director of Training. Chapter II is concerned
with the internal development and expansion of TRD and covers the
component structure of the Division, the staffing and space problems
attendant upon the growth of these components, and the development
of training courses initiated within these components to meet the
ever-increasing requirement levied upon TRD.
A. Organizational Structure
When the training units of OSO and OPC were merged on 17
September 1949 to form TRD, one of the first problems that faced Col.
I Iwas that of setting up an organizational structure. It seemed
apparent at the time that the missions of TRD could be classified in
three categories: training in covert operational techniques (trade-
craft); training in ctivities; and
 Approved For Release 2006i62 glT-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
'25X9
training of non-staff covert personnel -
Consequently, TRD's first organizational structure was composed of
three units: Staff Training,
Training, and Covert Train-
ing. It soon became obvious that the assessment and evaluation func-
tion could not be handled satisfactorily as a peripheral part of the
instructor's job, and an Assessment and Evaluation Unit was created.
When TRD was given the responsibility for the "holding" operation --
the unclassified training of provisionally cleared employees -- a
Branch was established for that activity. Naturally the support
structure grew along with the instructional units, and by June of 1951
the Support Branch included a Records and Registration Staff, a Doc-
trine Development Staff, a Planning Staff, and a Training Materials
Staff; there were also in the Support Branch an Administrative Officer
andl
of 1949, when
n October
vas appointed Chief of TRD, the Table of
Organization (T/O) of the Division authorized
1951, when]
of
0
positions.
11 See below, p. 55.
in April of
]left the Agency, TRD had an authorized T/O
-33-
 Approved For Release 2006/0,bQ, j J DP93-00791 R000100070001-3
At the time that TRD officially -- if only nominally -- became a part
of the Office of Training in July of 1951, it was operating with an organi-
zational structure that had, been authorized by the Assistant Deputy Director
for Administration on 7 March 1951. The Staff Training Section was
offering three principal courses '-- Staff Orientation, Operations, and
Advanced Operations. There was an Advanced Specialized Training
25X1
 Approved For Release 2006/0J ( j , ~l - DP93-00791 R000100070001-3
for training related to special projects. The Assessment and Evalu-
ation Unit had three parts -- Psychological Assessment Branch, a
Research and Validation Branch, and a Training Evaluation Branch.
The Support structure of TRD remained as it is described above.
B. Staffing Problems
During the rapid expansion of TRD, the problem of finding quali-
fied instructors to fill the authorized T/O was a major one. In
February of 1950, told the Joint Training Committee that
instructors were urgently needed for both the Operations Course and
the Advanced Operations Course and that 40 percent of the authorized
positions in TRD were vacant. The OSO representative on the Com-
mittee said that OSO would screen the lists of returning field person-
nel to see if any qualified instructors could be made available.
In March of 1950 again pointed out the great need
for instructors; at that time there were 26 vacancies. He reported
that the operational branches of OSO and OPC had been approached in
an effort to find personnel to man the Operations Course and the
See below, p. 83.
SL
~.11Li
 Approved For Release 2004[`` It\-RDP93-00791 R0001 00070001-3
1
I
Advanced Operations Course, in both of which the need was particu-
larly critical. In addition, he stated, TRD was trying to locate possi-
ble instructors in other Government Agencies -- CIC and FBI, for
example. The OSO representative said that the rotation policy of OSO
might make a few individuals available to TRD in the near future. In
July of 1950,
pointing out the pressing need in all Branches and asking them to pre-
pare lists of nam.es of possible candidates whore they might know
personally.
At a meeting of the Joint Training Committee in October of 1950,
I
have a total of 73 vacancies in instructor positions. He did not see
how TRD could meet the training requirements unless operationally
qualified instructors were secured. The OSO and OPC representa-
tives on the Committee stated that it was impossible to release per-
sonnel from OSO or OPC for assignment to TRD at that time. Again,
in November of 1950, the personnel needs of TRD were called to the
attention of the Committee, but it was concluded that nothing more
could be done to recruit instructors, and the hope was expressed
Annrn vPd Frw R l asp 200F104112 - CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
showed that the new T/O then awaiting approval would
 n Z`? r...~.
Approved For Release 2006/ t1. _ t ~RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
that the new DCI might make changes in the personnel procurement
procedures to improve the situation for the Agency as a whole.
As of 7 December 1950, TRD had an authorized T/
1
Actually, the shortage was not critical as the statistics might
indicate. In May of 1951, the Chief of the Agency's Personnel Divi-
sion pointed out that TRD had a total of 267 vacancies against which
only 126 recruitment requests had been submitted. Fifty six of the
project, not yet actually
launched. More than 100 of the total TRD vacancies on the T/O were
See below, p. 76.
See below, p. 84.
-37-
Annrr ,Prl Fnr RPIPasP 9nnR/fl4112 C;IA-RfP93-007918000100070001-8s.
 Approved For Release 2006/1:QRDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
positions could not be filled until the new training area had been pro-
cured, and many of them were low-level jobs for which it would be
preferable to recruit locally. In spite of these facts, TRD was still
hard pressed to find qualified instructors for critical courses.
Clerical personnel also were in short supply during this expand-
ing period. On 27 September 1951, for example, Training (Covert) --
then an element of the Office of Training -- had a T/O that approved
90 clerical positions, and only 36 of them were filled. On 6 Novem-
ber the situation was unchanged.
The really critical problem, however, continued to be the pro-
curement of instructors. The generation of a large requirement for
handling trainees
the principal cause of this pressure for additional instructors. In
January of 1951, for example, a large training organization was being
planned to cope with 300 trainees a month, half of whom would go
courses and half of whom would go into staff train-
ing courses. It was planned that this operation would begin in the
See below, p. 77.
Annrnved For Release 2006/04/12 CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/ l w ~~ h RDP93-007918000100070001-3
1
Writing to the Agency Advisor for Management regarding the
instructor procurement situation, Col. Baird, on 21 July 1951,
noted that the T/O of Training (Covert) was only about 40 percent full
in spite of the high priority given it by Personnel Procurement. He
felt that one of the explanations was the low salary level: good
instructors could not be procured at the GS-09 to GS-11 level. He
pointed out that OSS alumni could not be induced to come back by the
offer of a GS- l 1 and said that after two months of effort he had been
unable to recruit a single qualified language and linguistics instructor
at the salary level that he could offer. He stressed that if the Office
of Training was to meet the training commitments it had accepted, it
would have to be able to offer instructors a salary they could accept.
He felt that the practice of classifying instructors according to what
they taught was unfortunate in that it put the classification people in a
position of having to judge the relative merits of the subjects taught.
He asked, for example, what are the relative values of an instructor
in the Russian language and an instructor in Advanced Operations?
Here again the information given goes beyond the time-span of
this paper; it is provided to complete the account of the staffing
problem.
 006i'9 11Q ~ uA)-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
Approved For Release 2006/&/-__1(12)
Col. Baird said that he would prefer to have an Office of Training
"Faculty" T/O on an Office-wide basis and be able to use that faculty
where he needed to, depending on the versatility of the individual
and the training needs at a particular time. He pointed out that the
then-current OTR procedure of unit slotting necessitated a juggling of
slots and grades that was not always honest and often required subject-
matter comparisons that were invidious. He also pointed out the need
for sufficient numbers of GS-14 and GS-15 slots to enable the Office
of Training to recruit and hold the personnel it needed, and he stressed
the point that the reorganized Office of Training would have a T/O in
persons, would train thousands of people a year, and
would spend millions of dollars a year. To all intents and purposes,
the Office of Training had Office status under the DCI, and such status,
he felt, should be recognized officially by appropriate grade ratings.
During this 1949-51 period, the staffing problem was compounded --
as it had been for years and would continue to be -- by a policy that
called for the rotation of instructors. In a 1948 planning paper,
Chief of the OSO Training Staff before TRD was
-40-
 l.! E
Approved For Release 2006/041 ~AR bP93-00791 R000100070001-3
I 25X1
1
formed, had emphatically urged continuation of the policy of regular
rotation of instructors to operational assignments in order to keep the
instruction up-to-date and consistent with recent field experience.
actually prepared a complete rotation plan for each of the 32
people on duty with his Staff in December of 1948, but he could not
carry it out. In April of 1949, he again raised the question of the
orderly rotation of personnel and submitted a plan for an OSO "Per-
sonnel Board. " In that planning paper he stated, "I sincerely believe
that we should have within OSO a top-level. board approach to one of
the most important parts of our period of growth -- the proper selec-
tion, placement, and rotation of personnel. "
views on rotation policy. At a
meeting of the Joint Training Committee on 13 April 1950, the ques-
tion of rotation of TRD personnel was considered, and it was generally
agreed that those persons who had been in training for a number of
years should be reassigned, even though TRD was short of instructors.
The implementation of the agreement, however, proved to be very
difficult. At another meeting, on 5 September 1950, the Committee
reaffirmed the policy that to the greatest extent possible, TRD people
who had served the allotted time as instructors should be reassigned
 Approved For Release 200 4I1'4' a RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
to operational divisions. It was recognized., however, that in order
to effect such a policy, TRD would have to have qualified repl.acemen.ts,
and at that time TRD was losing more people than were being replaced.
In October of 1951 -- some months after the departure of Col..
-- the policy on rotation was reaffirmed in a paper submitted 25X1
to the Director of Training by
Chief of Training (Covert).
This paper provided a comprehensive plan for the orderly rotation of
TR(C) instructors. In a later supplement to his paper, -
forth the basic premise that the Agency would be best served by con-
tinuing rotation of personnel from the operating offices to TR(C) and
from TR(C) to the operating offices, and that the length of a tour as
instructor should be two years. He further stated that certain key per-
sonnel in executive and administrative posts should not be subject to
this general policy of rotation.
On 10 December 1951,1 howed his concern and frustra-
tion by addressing to the Director of Central Intelligence a memoran-
dum on the subject of the staffing of covert training, describing the
instructor situation as extremely critical, with the number of students
rising and the staff overdue for rotation to other assignments. He
believed that the only adequate solution was for OSO and OPC to supply
Annrn vPd Fnr Release 2006104112: CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 200,6/04112 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
1
TR(C) with personnel in substantial numbers at once. As they were
not doing so, he proposed as an emergency measure the rotation of
the most deserving of the TR(C) staff members no later than 1 April
1952, even though it might mean either a curtailment of the training
program or a lowering of the number of trainees. This proposal was
not acceptable to the DCI, and it was not adopted. In January of
1952,
was transferred to a staff position in OSO.
During the period before July of 1951, TRD was acquiring a repu-
tation as a unit that would not release its people for other assignments.
This reputation, deserved or not, made both the acquisition of new
instructors and the reassignment of TRD instructors more difficult.
On their own initiative, some TRD instructors promoted -- or at least
negotiated -- reassignments for themselves. On 18 June of 1951,
Acting Chief of TRD, issued a memorandum to all
TRD personnel regarding changes of assignments. He noted that in
the previous few weeks a number of cases had come up involving trans-
fer of people to the operating offices and that these transfers had been
made either without his knowledge or without proper clearance and,
consequently, had led to administrative confusion and personal
 Approved For Release 2006/6~j1 f': 1 LlA{RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
embarrassment. The response to the memorandum indicated that
there had been misunderstandings about whether or not some people
had gotten proper releases. He then put TRD personnel on notice
that an orderly procedure would be followed in the future.
D. Space
Because of the rapid growth in personnel, courses, and students
'25X1
25X1
in 1950 and 1951, TRD needed additional classroom and office space
to supplement that already in use in Buildings I T13, and T14.
Building was remodeled in the summer of 1950, and the Basic
Orientation Course and the new rapid reading course moved into that
building in the fall. In June of the same year, the Basic Orientation
0
The Administrative and Operations Courses were being held in
which had a small auditorium, adequate library space, and a
number of classrooms and offices of various sizes and shapes. Covert
Training had-been set up in L Building, the Basic and Interim Study
course (the "pool")"' was, in
=~= See below, p. 55.
SECRET
 Approved For Release 2006/0 2(Jl1~-DP93-007918000100070001-3
tJj ~._
At this time steps were taken to procure space in the
so-called Recreation and Services (R&S) Building.
origi- 25X1
nally wanted to use the large gymnasium in R&S for the physical con-
ditioning of OSO and OPC personnel, but this could not be worked out,
and the gymnasium became a classroom.
The Office of Training continued to occupy land most of
R&S for many years. Pressure for additional classrooms and offices
in these early years led to the gradual occupation of space in a number
of other buildings also -- Central Building, Eye Building, Quarters
Eye, 1016 16th Street, and Alcott Hall. There were also a number of
training sites under cover -- the Covert Training safehouses and the
field training installations.
This scattering of personnel and activities did not make for effi-
ciency. Most of the buildings were old temporary structures that did
not provide satisfactory classroom space. For several years -- until
air conditioning was finally approved -- classes were subject to dis-
missal during very hot weather, when rooms often had temperatures in
the high 90's. Ventilation was poor at best, fans were noisy, and roofs
leaked. It is a considerable tribute to the students and to the staffs of
-45-
SEC1 `_
 Approved For Release 200611~ `~' ,.C RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
the Office of Training that they put up with the conditions with as much
patience and understanding as they did.
During the period when Iwas Chief of TRD, the staff
was hard pressed to keep up with the demand for new courses to meet
the expanding requirements of OSO and OPC. A number of problems
developed, in addition to those of finding instructors with the knowl-
edge and experience to handle sophisticated new subject matter and of
acquiring approved doctrine. There was the matter of obtaining clear-
ance and approval for training materials that were developed. In 25X1
August of 1950, the Chief of TRD insisted that although the proposed
outline looked good to him, it was essential
that it be acceptable to all of the foreign Division Chiefs of OPC and be
coordinated with them to make sure that it incorporated techniques that
were applicable to their areas of operation. In September of 1950, the
prospectus for thel and those of three other
new TRD courses were submitted to the Joint Training Committee for
approval. The approval was given quickly, but the coordination with
the OPC Division Chiefs was long in coming.
SEC I
RE
A.-,r.r-ari c^r Palane onnntn /19 - flIA-RnPg`,-nn7g1 P000100070001-
 Approved For Release 2006104 ~ 1P)-RQP93-00791 R000100070001-3
At the end of 1950, the Staff Training Branch of TRD was offering
three courses for the staff officers of OSO and OPC. The first was
the Staff Orientation Course (also variously known at the time as the
Basic Orientation Course and the Basic Intelligence Course). It intro-
duced basic tools and techniques, such as reporting and interviewing,
and included a week of study on Communism and the USSR. The
material used in this course was not highly classified. Students then
went into the Operations Course, which for the most part took up the
methods and techniques of clandestine operations (tradecraft). The
third course, the Advanced Operations Course, presented discussions
of the Agency's clandestine missions and of the major operational
tasks of OSO and OPC.
Between 1 December of 1949 and 30 November of 1950, 208 stu-
dents went through the Staff Orientation Course; 276 through the Opera-
tions Course; and 160 through the Advanced Operations Course. By
February of 1950, the training load had become such that the Staff
Orientation Course began to overlap successive runnings. For a while
the instructional staff inFlwas beginning a new four-week Staff Ori-
entation Course every two weeks, with a full classroom at each end of
the building. The Operations Course also tried the overlapping scheme,
S E C R ..T"
 Approved For Release 2006/0,1 (I,4 DP93-00791 R000100070001-3
F_t!:
and other expedients were tried. At one time the Operations Course
was given in the auditorium of"and consisted entirely of lectures,
a small group of students -- selected on the basis of projected assign-
ments -- staying on for an additional week of exercises and problems.
As early as December of 1949, the rush to training was on, and train-
ing requests so far exceeded the student capacities of the courses that
the requests were being sent to the Executive Officer of OSO and the
Chief of Support of OPC for decisions on the priority selection of
trainees. Beginning in December of 1949, new personnel were not
entered in formal training classes but were scheduled for "Basic and
Interim Study" so that they would be under TRD control from the day
of entrance on duty until they had completed all their training.
It was generally felt in OPC that much of the material in the Staff
Orientation, Operations, and Advanced Operations Courses was not
applicable to the work of many of their staff officers; and OPC requested
a concentrated indoctrination course as a single substitute for the three
courses. By the end of November of 1950, .a short "Staff Indoctrination
Course" (SIC) was ready for presentation. It was aimed primarily at
giving the students an introduction to the missions, functions, and organ-
ization of OSO and OPC. During 1951, the class was split for many of
SECT k. E
 1
Approved For Release 2006/~45C:I rf, DP93-00791 R000100070001-3
-49-
the lectures -- OPC people were not exposed to lectures on OSO activi-
ties and vice versa. Until OSO and OPC were actually combined, stu-
dents from each Office were kept in the dark about the activities of the
other. For a time the Staff Orientation Course even ran separate sec-
tions so that OSO people and OPC people would not meet each other.
During 1950 several advanced courses were developed by TRD:
Operations,
USSR Operations, Communist Party
Planning were added. All of these courses depended to a great degree
on the participation of operational specialists from OSO and OPC, and
there were many course revisions and changes through the years.
In 1950 the Staff Training Section was presenting -- in addition to
the three major courses -- an Investigative Techniques Course and a
Basic Photography Course. Staff Training was also responsible for the
"interim studies, " which was designed to enable students to conduct
independent study and research during periods when they were awaiting
clearances or assignments. In December of 1950, the Rapid Reading
Course began in Building ^ The students spent one hour a day for
six weeks using various machines designed to increase the student's
 Approved For Release 2006/ 1
r-%-) 1~ ~~A.,F~DP93-00791 R000100070001-3
speed in the scanning of reading material. Because of the influx of
new instructors, an Instructor Training Course was also offered by
Staff Training. It met each morning for a week, and all TRD instruc-
tors were enrolled. The course covered the mission and functions of
TRD, methods of instruction, and methods of testing and evaluation.
During 1950 the Administrative Training Course was completely
revised. This course was designed primarily for junior administrative
assistants, clerks, and typists from both OSO and OPC. The primary
purpose of the course was to introduce the students to the pertinent
administrative procedures of the two covert Offices. The course was
concerned with both headquarters and field administrative problems,
and it relied heavily on outside speakers. At this time -- during 1950 it was deemed necessary to section the class so that OSO employees
heard only OSO material and OPC employees heard only OPC material.
1
SECS`
Annrnvarl Fnr RPIPasP 2ffF104112 - CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved* For Release 2006'1.12 -RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
0
Chapter III
Special. Probl.cins in Training
During the 1949-51 period when TRD was developing organiza-
tionally and expanding its activities to meet the many new require-
ments levied upon it, there arose a number of special problems --
problems that were peripheral, perhaps, to the major mission of TRD
but problems that had to be solved to permit the fulfillment of the
major missions. In this chapter a few of these problems are described.
A. Auditors
Because OSO and OPC followed no clear policy on enrollment in
full-time training courses, many new employees who were under pres-
sure to begin their jobs tried to get the required training by "auditing"
courses. This meant that either they attended classes without partici-
pating in exercises, quizzes, and discussions, or that they attended
lectures as time permitted and inclination moved them. For those
who wanted to avoid written evaluation of their performances in train-
ing, auditing provided an easy escape. The instructors were not
opposed to having available space occupied, and they rather welcomed
 Approved For Release 2006/ 4li .CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
1
the idea of an auditor category because in this way the classes could
be kept small -- the staging of class problems and, the writing of evalu-
ations remained manageable; but when the Agency began to expand
rapidly, the situation became serious.
In January of 1949, the Basic Course had 13 full-time students
and five auditors; in August of 1949, there were 20 students and five
auditors. In January of 1949, the Advanced Course had 19 students
and 19 auditors; by August the class had 11 full-time students and 12
auditors. During the entire period between 1 August of 1948 and 31
July of 1949, OSO had 287 full-time students and 148 auditors; OPC
had 16 students and 31 auditors.
By September of 1950, the situation had become worse. In a
memorandum of 7 September 1950, the Chief of Staff Training pointed
out to the Chief of TRD that the number of people in courses was in-
creasing but those who were enrolled as auditors were attending no
more than two or three lectures. He said that some of these auditors
might later claim credit for "completing" the course on the flimsy
basis of having attended a few lectures.
In October of. 1950, the problem of auditors was the subject of a
discussion in a meeting of the Joint Training Committee. Both the
_52-
A nrim%larl Fnr Release 9006/84117 CIA-RDP 3-007 1 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
L ' 1 L.
OSO and the OPC members stated their opposition to the practice, and
the Committee agreed to a policy that the auditing of courses was to be
strongly discouraged. In the future, approval would be granted only
after a very careful review of each case, and the Registrar of TRD
was instructed to consult the OSO or the OPC member of the Committee
when the number of auditors exceeded a "reasonable" number. It was
also agreed that the Committee should look at the problem again after
60 days.
The problem was gradually resolved as the number of students to
be trained became so large that every available seat was occupied by a
full-time student. In both OSO and OPC the realization grew that audit-
ing was no substitute for training; only in the case of high-ranking
officials was the practice really approved (for example, early in Col.
Baird's career, a program was drawn up to enable him to audit the
essential elements of all the courses then being presented, )
See above, p. 26.
EC
AnnrnvPd For Release 006/04/1 : biA-RDP93-00791R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/04 'clAd pP93-00791 R000100070001-3
The 1949-51 period saw the beginning of a new policy that has
continued to the present time. A memorandum of 26 July 1950 from
the Executive Officer of OSO to the AD/SO reported a conversation
'25X1 betwee the OSO member of the Joint Training Committee,
F5X1
and I I in which they agreed that responsibility for arranging
for Agency personnel to give lectures for various other governmental
activities should be delegated to the Chief of TRD. The AD/SO
approved this delegation because he felt that TRD had more speakers
readily available to meet outside requests than did the operating ele-
ments, and the use of instructors represented a minimum interruption
of operational activities.
TRD then began to provide lecturers for other agencies of the
government and to arrange for speakers from other parts of the
Agency, as well. For example, in December of 1950
tured on intelligence subjects to the Strategic Intelligence School of
the Army. In 1951
of TRD was lecturing regularly on
Russian espionage at the Office of Special Investigation Training
AnnrnvPrl For RPIPasP 2006104112 CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/0 CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
C. The "Pool"
1
A memorandum of 30 September 1949 front if OPC
to indicates that in OPC a procedure had been in effect
since 26 July 1949, designed to keep "semi-covert" OPC operational
personnel "busy and under control" until such time as they could enter
formal training classes. She pointed out that this procedure, an al-
ternative to assignment to the "uncleared pool" with its attendent
security risks, appeared unduly elaborate and cumbersome; most of
the individuals concerned, after being entered on duty quite covertly,
would eventually lose their covert status by taking courses in Agency
buildings. A simpler procedure was then set up. These students
became a separate section of the TRD Basic and Interim Study Courses
(BISC), and were given prepared research directives which in most
cases were related to area or operational problems of interest to the
staffs and divisions sponsoring the students' training.
In a memorandum to the AD/SO and the AD/PC on 9 February
explained that the aim of the BISC was to develop in
the students a background for the areas to which they would be assigned
and at the same time to implant a thorough security consciousness.
r '
AnnrnvPrl Fnr RPlPasP 2006/04/12 - CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
25X1
 Approved For Release 2006/
11 :s_ DP93-00791 R000100070001-3
The research topics were on such subjects as "Strategic Aspects of
China" and "International Politics of Greece;" for the most part, the
research was done at the Library of Congress, using overt sources.
A list of topics being worked on in April of 1950 shows such
subjects as "Refugee Groups in Germany, " "Labor Problems of the
Salonika Area, " and "Oil in the Arab World. " By October of 1951,
the number of students in this program became so great that the load
was becoming such that the one TRD man assigned to the program
could not handle it, and plans were drawn up for a staff of four, with
appropriate space and accommodations, to handle up to 100 students
a month from both OSO and OPC. In January of 1952, plans had been
made to include lectures, movies, and group discussions on such un-
classified topics as "Understanding Foreign People" and "Formula-
tion of Foreign Policy. "
The history of this OSO-OPC "pool" is a complicated one. It is
made even more confusing by the fact that a separate pool was estab-
lished in April of 1951 for intelligence analysts and other "non-covert"
employees -- this was the unit established by OTR, before TRD became
a part of OTR, and named the "Unclassified Training Group A" (UTG/A).
 25X1 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 200610-A ?:rOJZ RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
E. Improvement of Quality
While he was Chief of TRD,
pressed vigorously to
improve the quality of the instruction. His Training Review Commit-
tee has already been described. In 1950 he initiated an Instructor
Training Course. In March of that year, a Training Aids Specialist
251
In May of 1948, had visited Washington and had con-
ferred with then Chief of OSO' s Training Staff.
See above p. 16.
C1
 Approved For Release 2006184, 1 - CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
t
and a Projectionist were hired; and in expectation of their services,
1 -1
assigned an Educational. Specialist to audit all courses,
to identify areas where training aids could be used, and to hold follow-
up conferences with the instructors and work out the exact nature of
the aids.
25X1 In February of 1950,1 issued a comment sheet that was
to be filled out by the trainees at the conclusion of their training; it
solicited student opinion on the quality of instruction and the quality
of course content, and it invited the students' ideas for improvement.
To encourage complete frankness and to ensure that the students'
comments would not adversely affect their grades in the courses, the
completed sheets were forwarded directly to the Chief of TRD in a
sealed envelope without being seen by the instructors.
In July of 1950, Course Chiefs were asked to submit a percentage
breakdown of how each instructor spent an average working day. The
Chief of the Advanced Operations Course was eventually excused from
this task when it turned out that during eight weeks of instruction car-
ried on without a break he could not find the time to perform the
analysis.
-60-
`.. ~.i
 Approved For Release 2006/01J f2 ft.DP930079 1 R000100070001-3
On many occasions
clarified his philosophy of train-
ing. On 28 August 1950, for example, he wrote the following on a
routing sheet:
With the varying grade averages coming out of the Admin-
istrative Course, it is essential at this time that some mean
standards be established. There is too great a tendency for
the grades to fluctuate from a very low average to a high aver-
age and vice versa. As I visualize the situation, the instruc-
tion in the Administrative Course, and any course for that
matter, should entail first, presentation of the principle in
form of lectures, conferences, etc. ; application of techniques
in the form of exercises, demonstrations and so on; and
finally a test to evaluate the students' knowledge of the princi-
ple and their ability to apply the techniques to a given prob-
lem.
He followed the conduct of the training very closely, and he established
a practice of dropping in on classes from time to time and of walking
unannounced into an instructor's office, sitting down, and asking the
instructor about his problems.
who had been an OSO officer, be-
Deputy in October of 1949, he was assigned a num-
ber of responsibilities; among them were the maintenance of training
records, training evaluations, and instructor training. In April of
1,950,
spent a week at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, where he
had been an instructor during the war. He was briefed on all aspects
SECRET
 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 ;.CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
of instructor training and guidance at the Command and General Staff
College, and he came back to TRD with many ideas about the conduct
of instruction, the maintenance of records, and the preparation of
evaluations. He recommended -- and
1 :1
approved -- the
TRD adoption of the Leavenworth method of instructor training. Col.
called together all of the instructors to hear
report
and to see a staged demonstration that illustrated conference methods
and techniques.
Perhaps the most far-reaching result of recommenda-
tions was the requirement for lesson plans. A "Training Materials
Officer" was appointed and directed to set up a folder for each presen-
tation given in TRD courses (except covert training courses). This
folder was to contain a presentation directive that had been coordinated
with OSO and OPC; a bibliography, if appropriate; lecture outlines;
and complete transcripts of the lectures. These folders were to be
kept up to date by continual review and revision. Copies of charts
and other handouts were also to be included. The lectures given by
guest speakers were to be recorded, and was wired to make
this possible.
(-n
nnrnircrl ~nr Palanca )nnAinA11) (,IA-RnPP -nn7G1 8000100070001-=
 Approved For Release 2006/6,42 : CAIRDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
Although. this lesson-plan program accomplished a great deal in
the way of making instructors organize their material and provided a
measure of control over the general content, it did not really work
very well. The instructors resisted because they were carrying
heavy loads of teaching and had difficulty in finding the time to work
their notes into suitable form. More seriously, much of the material
given in lectures was subject to change from one class to the next,
in some cases because of Agency reorganization and in others because
of revised procedures and doctrine. On 8 May 1950, for example, the
Chief Instructor of the Operations Course reported a list of 37 lectures
for which there were either outlines of transcripts, but he made the
point that most of the lectures were preliminary efforts which, although
doing justice to the topic, were not final formats, either in content
or in manner of presentation.
The lesson-plan system really broke down because there was not
enough clerical help to transcribe and type the huge volume of material
and there was not available enough expertise to set up a review pro-
cedure to make real use of the folders after they had been produced.
On 15 June 1950, for example, it was reported that 107 dictaphone
belts and eight wire recordings were waiting to be transcribed; about
Annroved For Release 200610411 :- I la .P93-007918000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/048f.f -"P
JI LR P93-00791 R000100070001-3
I 25X1
four hours were required for the transcription of each belt and each
recording. Afterl eft TRD in April of 1951, the program
was gradually abandoned under the pressure of more immediate
demands on instructors and clerks.
One of greatest concerns was the control of guest lec-
turers. TRD had necessarily relied from the'beginning on knowledge-
able guest speakers from OSO and OPC. The Advanced Operations
Course in November of 1949, for example, included the following guest
More
than two-thirds of the lectures in all courses were given by guests.
Control of the content of their presentations was a continuing problem.
Because of repeated complaints about the low quality of the guest
lectures, ssued orders in April of 1950 that an instructor
had to be present during each lecture presentation, and that he should
analyze the lecture by means of a check sheet that would eventually be
who would then present the results -- with
suggestions for improvement -- to the Joint Training Committee. The
problem was not solved by this device, however, nor by other direc-
tives and procedures brought to bear afterl had left TRD.
S
AnnrnvPd For RPIPacP 2000/04/12 C;IA-R .P93-00791 R000100070001-3_
 Approved For Release 2006/0h12; 1DP93-00791 R0001 00070001-3
Chapter IV
The rapid expansion of training activities in 1950 and 1951 was
the result of requirements projected by OPC and, to a lesser extent,
by OSO as well -- requirements that were later to be described as
"grandiose" by the Inspector General. These requirements called
for the establishment of large training facilities outside the Washing-
ton area. Such camps had been used by OSS, but they had been given
up by the end of 1945 and were not considered again until the establish-
ment of OPC. The following narrative is a summary of the activities
of TRD during 1950 and 1951 in response to the requirements for
expanded
training.
1
The Inspector General's report of the Survey of the Office of Train-
ing conducted late in 1953.
Doi---o )nnnrnami?ML nPQ_, -_nn7P1P000100070001-3
 25X1 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 200
9,4T 4
5. Problems with Trainees. Thirteen of the students of the
first class at TC-1, when they were debriefed, were critical of much
of the instruction and suggested the need for a greater number of
practical exercises. At least three of these men seemed to be impro-
perly motivated for paramilitary work. An effort was made to cast
the work in more practical terms and to improve the instruction
S E C F-l ....pt_.
Annroved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/0 2 .~6jA= OP93-00791 R000100070001-3
generally. TRD also tried to establish an evaluation system that would
identify students who were not qualified or motivated for the training.
When the members of class No. 3 performed very poorly in training
and did not live up to the abilities indicated by their background and
their test scores, an investigation was called for. In August of 1951,
the Chief of the Training Evaluations Section of TRD compiled a report
based on interviews with members of the class; he had investigated
the reasons for the abnormally low training records, the low morale,
the apathetic attitude, and the marked resentment and bitterness about
their Agency jobs and the training they had received. He noted that 17
out of 18 students had performed worse in the third phase than they
had in the first. Seven students had resigned from the program during
training, one had been asked to leave, two had resigned upon comple-
tion of training, and one was in the process of resigning. Among the
causes for this state of affairs he identified:
(1) inadequate briefing of the candidates on their pro-
jected assignments at the time of original recruitment;
(2) inadequate, inconsiderate, and poorly planned
administrative handling of students by OPC prior to, during,
and after training;
Annr v d For RPIPae .2006104 1 2i - t IA-PbP -00791 R000100070001-
3
 Approved For Release 2006/0'4fl'fr:r'(~1 ;1RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
(3)
inadequate protection of cover during the training;
(4) ineffective training techniques
1
(6) lack of comprehension by OPC desk officers of the
kind of training the students received (they were commonly
identified in OPC as muscle-men).
Although as a result of this investigation steps were taken to cure the 25X1
deficiencies in the program, the handling of the trainees at
0
tinued to be a touchy problem to the end; at that stage of the develop-
ment of TRD and of OPC, some of the causes were beyond remedy.
D. Mobilization Training Program
At some time in early 1950, OPC submitted to TRD its training
requirements in the event of mobilization. This project called for
establishing a program of instruction and training at a
There appears to be no documentary record of the actual submittal
of the OPC requirements to TRD. The first record of a discussion of
the requirements, and of TRD's plan to meet them, appears in the
minutes of a meeting of the Joint Training Committee on 20 July
1950.
-76-
Arrnrnved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/6)Q4 :rC
. ~AIDP93-007918000100070001-3
JLUiL.
1
I 25X9
the near future and that the safehouse section of the Area Training
Branch would also be shifted t The other 150 trainees,
representing the OSO mobilization requirement, would receive
advanced training at other facilities.
By March of 1951, TRD realized that to meet the new and expanding
requirements, it must reorganize. In a Joint Training Committee meet-
ing on 15 March 1951
pointed out that TRD must plan to
recruit and train instructors immediately to be ready for the increased
training demands. The revised T/O submitted to the Committee by
was based on providing traininlOSO and OPC staff
personnel per month, a total o
annually. Althoug
the Assistant DD/P for Administration, pointed out to the Committee
that regardless of training estimates, TRD must base its organization
realistically on the capabilities of Security to clear prospective employ-
ees, it was agreed that in any event TRD must realign its organization
to fit the acquisition and utilization of the
This was a period of somewhat frantic planning of courses, organi-
zation, and facilities. On 2 March 1951,
to the ADD/A calling for the approval o~
approval in principle of a planned T/O o
~ r
SEU ET
submitted a T/O
25X1
'25X1
 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
25X1
Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
SEC Ilk E.,. T
- Chapter V
Summary and Conclusion
The preceding chapters have recorded the problems and major
activities of TRD during the 1949-51 period when the Division went
through a transitional development from a relatively small staff,
--functioning in consonance with the. traditions and practices inherited
from OSS, to a large, complex training organization capable of meet-
---ing the ever-growing requirements for training in the clandestine activi-
ties that became distinctly those of the Central Intelligence Agency.
This chapter places the 1949-51 period within the context of the time,
summarizes significant problems and accomplishments, and capsul-
izes in chronological order the major developments of the period.
A. The Temper of the Times 25X1
The 1949-51 period whe was Chief of TRD was a time
when there was widespread belief that the cold war was about to turn
hot and that general mobilization was more than a possibility. Indeed,
the advent of the Korean War in 1950 not only gave credence to this
belief but also brought to bear upon the Agency tremendous pressure
Crtr Dala~en onnrInAr19 - riv-Rflp94-07791 PQQQ100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/041 f?~ tt -5.DP93-00791 R000100070001-3
to meet the intelligence support requirements of the Korean War and
to prepare for whatever wider conflagration might next be generated.
It was within this climate of tension and urgency that TRD --
without a solid administrative structure, without firm guidance in
operational doctrine, and without enough manpower to do the basic
jobs that had to be done -- was asked to train thousands of people in
hundreds of operations skills. The fact that these thousands of people
never materialized is irrelevant to the tensions of the time. When
projects
and the Mobilization Training
Program were launched, for example, there was every reason to be-
lieve that they we-re essential to the security of the nation. The pres-
sures were real and present, and the fact that TRD responded to them
with practicable programs is in itself a high tribute tol and
the men and women who worked with him in TRD.
B. Summary
1. Development of TRD. Even if the 1949-51 period had not
been one with a climate of threatening hot war and the consequent
tensions and pressures, the task of developing the newly created Train-
ing Division to the point where it was fully capable of meeting the
r,r+rniarJ Cnr P i cc onnn/na/19? r.in-RnPq`J-nn7QIRflfl(l1(lfl(170Q01-3
 Approved For Release 2006/c8ltlt`.f-~f.A rI DP93-00791 R000100070001-3
I
Agency's training requirements was a formidable one. To begin with,
there were for TRD no clearly defined channels of command, no sys-
tematic budget and finance procedures, no proper method of handling
personnel, and no system of liaison between TRD and the operating
Offices. All of .these problems had to be attacked, and solutions or partial solutions -- of them had to be found.
Equally troublesome was the problem of determining training
requirements and designing courses to meet them -- particularly in
the absence of clearly defined training objectives and agreed opera-
tional doctrine upon which objectives had to be based. Although the
requirements-objectives-doctrine problem was not solved during the
1949-51 period, a start was made and the solving machinery was set
in motion.
At the same time that TRD was plagued by problems of admin-
istration and training requirements, it was confronted with questions
of jurisdictional responsibility -- first in the matter of support of
overseas training, and later in the relationship of TRD to the newly 25X1
created Director of Training. By the time
left the Agency
in April of 1951, TRD had assumed major responsibility for the support
-96-
I'a'i't C.
 Approved For Release 2006/ ?,4/12,: CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
1
25X1
25X1
25X1
1
of overseas training.
2. Expansion of TRD. The developmental problems of TRD
could not, of course, claim the undivided efforts o4 __j and
his staff. At the same time that these problems were pressing for
solution, TRD was being forced to expand its services to the operating
Offices, to provide more training for more people and to develop the
capability of offering new courses in virtually every phase of opera-
tional activity. To meet these demands it was necessary to develop
a workable internal organizational structure so that responsibilities
could be assigned and authority delegated. The basic pattern first
established by
Training Unit, a
was a three-unit organization -- a Staff
Training Unit,. and a Covert Training
Unit. As requirements expanded, additional units were created to
meet them -- an Assessment and Evaluation Unit and a Support Branch,
for example -- and additional people were required to man the units.
In October of 1949, whe unit was officially designated TRD,
the Division TO authorized positions; in April of 1951, when Col.
II
left the Agency, TRD had an authorized TO of~ositions.
 Approved For Release 2006/04,1L (.t4ijDP93-00791 R0001 00070001-3
The rapid expansion of TRD activities and personnel strength
naturally created staffing problems. It was almost impossible to fill
all of the authorized slots with qualified people. Field operational
activities got first priority, and there were not enough operationally
qualified people available for assignment to instructor slots. Compli-
cating the staffing problem was the policy of rotational assignment of
personnel -- both out of TRD to operational jobs and from operational
jobs into TRD. This phase of the staffing problem was 'a critical one
throughout
tenure, and it has continued, in some degree,
up to the present time.
Along with the expansion of TRD's activities there came pres-
sing requirements for additional course offerings and for additional
space for training programs. New courses were developed and coor-
dinated with the operating Offices, and additional space -- often make-
shift and inadequate -- was found.
3. Special Problems. Concurrent with the problems inherent
in the development and expansion of TRD, there arose a number of
related special problems. For example, the number of OSO and OPC
officers who preferred to "audit" courses instead of "take" them be-
came so great that a system of limiting auditors had to be devised.
S Ll:s aL. E
Anoroved For Release 2006/04/12 - CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/ #~~:fc{A-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
]devoted
A..r,r.,.,r rl Cnr Qoio. ga OQQA1tl t19 - f IA-RnPg'i-Cln7G1 Rnnn1 nnn70001-
Also, the responsibility of providing Agency speakers for other govern-
ment activities fell. to TRD and required manpower and time that were
needed in Agency training activities. TRD was given the responsibility
of maintaining a "pool" for provisionally cleared personnel, an activity
designed to keep people profitably employed while awaiting final clear-
ance. Still another special problem arose with TRD' s effort to estab-
training activities. Perhaps the most
important of the special problems was the need for systematic improve-
ment of the quality of training, a problem to which
a considerable part of his total time and effort.
 25X1 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
C. Chronology
5 August 1949
14 September 1949
17 October 1949
16 December 1949
5 August 1949.
By
appointed Chief, Training Staff, OSO.
OSO and OPC training units formally 25X1
and AD/PC.
Staff attached to OSO for organization
but Chief responsible to both AD/SO
merged into single Staff undel
14 September 1949.
First official reference to conversion
of Training Staff to Training Division (TRD).
Memorandum from CIA Executive Offi-
cer to CIA Management Officer; TRD to
continue under "committee-type" control --
i.e. Joint (OSO and OPC) Training Com-
mittee; remained so until 1 July 1951.
. "=101
A --o4 I-nr R'nIc^cc')nnr,-~na1-t .iA-RnPgi-nn7g1 Rnnn100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/04/le, 93-00791 R000100070001-3
9 February 1950
21 June 1950
TRD assumed responsibility for
maintaining "pool" of uncleared.
personnel; pool became a section
of the Basic and Interim Study
Course (BISC).
20 July 1950 TRD given responsibility for develop-
ing Mobilization Training Program.
25 July 1950 ubmitted to AD /SO and 25X1
26 July 1950
AD/PC a statement of "The Mission
of the Training Division, " the first
systematic recording of TRD's
training responsibilities.
AD/SO assigned to TRD responsi-
bility for providing Agency speakers
for non-Agency government activi-
ties.
A.^rti r...iarl Crtr Qala?cn onfAtn /1') ? r`IA_RnPA4-00791 R000100070001-
 Approved. For Release 2006/ 1' *(,q k--RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
9 November 1950
15 November 1950
20 December 1950
.3 January 1951
4 January 1951
13 January 1951
14 February 1951
22 March 1951
Col. Matthew Baird, USAF, appointed
CIA Director of Training
Projecti
approved.
CIA Office of Training created, Col.
Baird in. charge as Director of
Training.
Office of Deputy-Director for Plans
(DD/P) created.
TRD assigned to provide training
program forl
I lappointed OSO
Training Officer -- the first appoint-
ment of a full-time training liaison
officer in a major Agency component.
Memorandum from the DCI, General
Smith, to the DD/A, the AD/SO,
the AD/PC, and the Director of
 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
Training clarifying the function of the
Director of Training.
1 April 1951
appointed Acting
Chief of TRD to replacI
18 April 1951
-June 1951
I 25X1
who was recalled to military duty.
Office of Training transferred from
DD/A to O/DCI. CIA Regulation No.
I I
26 June 1951 DD/P notified AD/SO and AD/PC that
1 ,July 1951
TRD would be detached from OSO as of
1 July 1951 and would become a com-
ponent of the DD/P. 25X1
assigned TRD,
renamed Training (Covert), to the Office
of Training.under the nominal command
of the Director of Training.
18 April 1951.
 Approved For Release 2006/r4/1 t~kffZDP93-007918000100070001-3
Appendix A
Identification of Positions
Following are identifications of the positions held by the major
OSO, OPC, and DDP personnel mentioned. The positions identified
are those held during the approximate time-span of this paper. Mili-
tary ranks then held are given for military officers assigned to duty
with the Agency.
Annrnvarl Fnr RPIPasP 2OO6/04112 C;IA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 25x1 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/041 IA; P W93-00791 R000100070001-3
1
Appendix B
Missions and Functions of TRD
Following is the statement of the mission and functions of TRD
given in a memorandum of 25 July 1950, "The Mission of the Training
Division, " from
Chief of TRD, to the AD/SO
and the AD/PC:
Mission
Providing instruction in the several activities charged to OSO
and OPC in order to qualify staff personnel in the planning, organiza-
tion, conduct, and administration of these activities both in the field
and in headquarters and in order to properly train agent personnel
for their specific assignments.
Functions
(1) To ascertain the training requirements of OSO and OPC;
(2) to organize, supervise, and administer adequate training
programs, staffs, and facilities within the U. S. , to fulfill the train-
ing requirements of OSO and OPC, including staff personnel, agent
LAIL
Annrn vPdl For RPlPasP 2006/04/12 - CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/04/'2!7
tl~ ; IP93-007918000100070001-3
r
(3) to provide assistance and technical staff supervision to
training conducted in overseas areas;
(4) to insure that the training of each individual is consistent
with the cover and security of his proposed assignment;
(5) to arrange and schedule with outside government and pri-
vate agencies such other training as may be required;
(6) to provide training evaluations of student personnel for
assistance to their sponsoring branches in determining assignments;
(7) to conduct such liaison within OSO, OPC, and the remainder
of CIA and other outside agencies as may be required to provide a
fully coordinated training program;
personnel
(8)
to conduct applied research on training content and method;
(9) to prepare budgetary estimates for all training activity;
(10) to administer overall TRD personnel, funds, supplies, and
facilities;
(11) to assist in the preparation of mobilization plans to fulfill
training requirements of OSO and OPC in the event of an emergency;
(12) to provide policy guidance and administrative support to
the Assessment Staff.
LJ`
 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
~Ti_..1.~ ItM
1
Remarks to Training Review Comnzit:tee
Following is a condensation of the remarks of
to the members of the Training Review Committee at the final
been retained to the extent that the minutes recorded it: 25X1
meeting of the Committee on 19 June 1950; the condensation is based
on the minutes of that meeting, andi own phraseology has
Appendix C
told the Committee that when training had first started,
1
r
it pretty much had to accept the ideas that were lodged in the heads
of the various instructors because hardly anything had been put down
in black and white. Within the last year, he felt, tremendous strides
had been made, but the only thing that was vitally important was
whether the instruction was according to the requirements of OSO
and OPC. "Are we teaching
the way OSO is actually con-
ducting it?" "Are we teaching
the way the opera-
tional and planning staffs feel that we should teach it? " "Is the
doctrine which we are developing identical to the doctrine which is
being developed in OPC? "
ar o?io.,-- Onna/fill/1'? ? rla-Rnpg4-nn7glRnnnlnnn7nnnl-
 Approved For Release 2006/0413 1~. , R . P93-00791 R000100070001-3
cnt on to say that TRD was vitally interested in
I.
making certain that what was being said in class was according to the
doctrine and the principles which the operational people were apply-
ing. He hoped that through this committee T.RD would be able to
bring the training effort, into line with operations. He wanted to be
shown where TRD was out of line and what could be done to improve
the instruction, to make it realistic, and to keep it up to date. He
furthermore hoped that out of this committee would come a procedure
whereby TRD could coordinate instruction on doctrine, principles,
techniques, and tactics with the operating Divisions. He went on to
say that basically he felt that the relationship between Training and
OSO and OPC was vitally important and he wanted to get down to a
complete working arrangement. He stated that doctrine and coordina-
tion were his main concerns. He said that he welcomed criticism as
long as it was constructive and not picayunish. He wanted to know
what was being done wrong in Training because Training had to keep
up to date and realistic.
Aooroved For Release 2006/04?1L' -DP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 25x1 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
 Approved For Release 2006/04/12 : CIA-RDP93-00791 R000100070001-3
SECRET
CIA Internal Use Only-
Access Controlled by
the Directorate of
Support
SECRET