Markdown lines 776–1061 · Part 3 of 3
circumstances of the operation. Such clues as nods of approval,
voice inflection and suggestive questioning happen all too often.
2. Second, the customer can become frustrated because
experience has shown that some of the information provided is of
such a nature that it cannot be either verified or rejected
through follow-up analysis or investigations. Until the
10
SECRET
NOT RELEASABLE TO FOREIGN NATIONALS
LIMITED DISSEMINATION
STAR, GATE
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
--- PAGE 15 (OCR) ---
Approved For Release 2000/08/fF' CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
operation is actually completed, some of the information remains
plausible and possible true, but until an operation is completely
over, it cannot be evaluated fairly.
3. Third, the customer, like the monitor can become
frustrated with a remote viewer because of the nature of the
psychic information which can seem incomplete, sporadic and
sometimes symbolic and irrelevant.
E. (S/NF/SG/LIMDIS) When a remote viewer has completed the
sessions necessary to collect the information required, he or she
will then write his or her report. The format of the report is
- exactly the same as that which is utilized for Proficiency
Enhancement Projects, except a source number will be utilized
instead of an identification number.
F. (S/NF/SG/LIMDIS) The remote viewer's reports will then
be given to the Activity Chief and customer in their entirety.
This includes all "raw" data and sketches. The viewer's findings
must be analyzed and acted upon by the customer only. This is
due to the fact that if information is analyzed or changed in-
house, or withheld from the customer, it can detract from
possible successes. An objective analysis from the operational
user is mandatory because we cannot be our own customer.
G. (S/NF/SG/LIMDIS) Research and experience has shown that
a remote viewer's first impressions are for the most part, the
most germane. This has been clearly demonstrated to be true in
both laboratory conditions and in operational activities.
H. (S/NF/SG/LIMDIS) Since an Operational Project can
sometimes be an on-going project, feedback cannot be provided
immediately. During this time frame, it is imperative that the
remote viewer's do not discuss among themselves their project
findings. The Activity Chief must not discuss the project among
the viewers and he must keep all session data confidential.
I. (S/NF/SG/LIMDIS) When the Operational Project is
completed, the customer will provide feedback utilizing an
evaluation to the Activity Chief and the remote viewers.
Customer evaluations are usually received through DIA to the
Activity Chief and the remote viewers.
VI. (U) EVALUATION:
A. (S/NF/SG/LIMDIS) Upon completion of an in-house
investigation and/or operational project, a numeric and written
assessment will be provided by the Project Officer and/or the
customer regarding the value of the information a remote viewer
has received during a remote viewing session.
12
SECRET
NOT RELEASABLE TO FOREIGN NATIONALS
LIMITED DISSEMINATION
STAR GATE
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00782R000500590002-7
--- PAGE 16 (OCR) ---
Approved For Release 2000/08/14" GER-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
B. (S/NF/SG/LIMDIS) The Project Officer and/or customer
will be required to complete the Activity's Project Evaluation
Feedback Form. (See Appendix D) This form will allow the
Project Officer and/or customer to assign a numeric score both to
the accuracy and the value of the information reported by the
remote viewers in response to taskings. The Project Officer
and/or customer are also required to provide a narrative response
as well to the information received by the remote viewers.
VII. (U) CONCLUSION:
(S/NF/SG/LIMDIS) In conclusion, the directive describes how
remote viewers are to be utilized by this Activity. Moreover,
the policies and procedures described in this directive will also
govern how this Activity conducts both its in-house
investigations mission and operational projects. This directive
serves as a follow-on to the one published in October 1993 which
describe Activity procedures for selecting and training new
personnel.
12
SECRET
NOT RELEASABLE TO FOREIGN NATIONALS
LIMITED DISSEMINATION
STAR GATE
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
--- PAGE 17 (OCR) ---
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
APPENDIX A
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
--- PAGE 18 (OCR) ---
Approved For Release 2000/00/11" GIA: RUP96-00792R000500590002-7
TASKING SHEET
1. PROJECT NUMBER:
2. VIEWER NUMBER:
3. DATE:
4. TASKING:
5. EVALUATION:
6. COMPLETION DATE:
A-1
UNCLASSIFIED :
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
--- PAGE 19 (OCR) ---
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
APPENDIX B
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
--- PAGE 20 (OCR) ---
Approved For Release 2000/00/14" GIA- ROP96-00792R000500590002-7
REPORT
1. PROJECT NUMBER:
2. VIEWER NUMBER:
3. DATE:
4. SESSION DATE(S):
5. INFORMATION:
B-1
UNCLASSIFIED
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
--- PAGE 21 (OCR) ---
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
APPENDIX C
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
--- PAGE 22 (OCR) ---
ee
Approved For Release 2000/08? E1A-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
organizations and Institutes. available for enhancing capability
Egar Cayce Foundation
P.O. Box 656
Virginia Beach, VA 23451-0656
Parapsychological Association, Inc.
P.O. Box 12236
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Spiritual Science Fellowship
1974 de Maisonneuve W.
Montreal, Canada
The Monroe Institute
Route 1, Box 175
Fabes, VA 22938-9749
c-1
UNCLASSIFIED :
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
--- PAGE 23 (OCR) ---
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
APPENDIX D
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
--- PAGE 24 (OCR) ---
SECRET
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
PROJECT EVALUATION FEEDBACK
SG1J PROJECT NO. _
DATE OF PROJECT
The following is an evaluation form for the project you reviewed. Please
complete this form and return to Chief, PAG-TA.
A. Is the information accurate? (Circle response)
Categories Source Source Source
A B £
Yes (true) (1) (1) (1)
May be true (2) (2) (2)
Possibly true (3) (3) (3)
No (4) (4) (4)
Possibly not true (5) (5) (5)
Unsure (6) (6) (6)
B. . What is value of the Source(s)' information? (Circle response)
Major significance (1) (1) (1)
High value (2) (2) (2)
Of value (3) G3) (3)
Low value (4) (4) (4)
No value (5) (5) (5)
UNCLASSIFIED WHEN BLANK
SECRET
NOT RELEASABLE TO FOREIGN NATIONALS
LIMITED DISSEMINATION
STAR GATE
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
--- PAGE 25 (OCR) ---
: SECRET
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7
Provide rationale/analysis which led
Rationale for source evaluation.
Include confirmatory/new
Cc.
to your evaluation of responses provided above.
confirmatory data and whether collection requirements are currently
ther obtain or verify such data. Please provide your
validated/tasked to ei
written evaluation by source.
D.
NAME OFFICE/PHONE NUMBER
UNCLASSIFIED WHEN BLANK
. SECRET
NOT RELEASABLE TO FOREIGN NATIONALS
LIMITED DISSEMINATION
STAR GATE
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP96-00792R000500590002-7