All of the above come from joint intelligence planning: Dynamic Threat Assessment, Annex B: Intelligence, and the National Intelligence Support Plan.

What joint intelligence planning actually spits out in JOPES

If you’ve ever looked at a battlefield plan and thought, “Where did all this information come from, and who decided what mattered most?” you’re not alone. In Joint Operation Planning and Execution System (JOPES), intelligence isn’t a separate add-on. It’s woven into the planning process from the first briefing to the last execution order. The question often shows up in study materials: which products may result from joint intelligence planning? The answer is simple, and a little elegant: All of the above. Dynamic Threat Assessments, Annex B: Intelligence, and the National Intelligence Support Plan all emerge from the same planning thread, each playing a vital, interlocking role.

Let me explain how these pieces fit together—and why they matter when operations unfold in real time.

Three players, one orchestra

Dynamic Threat Assessment (DTA)

Think of the DTA as the ongoing weather report for the battlefield. It’s not a one-and-done snapshot; it’s a continuously updated view of threats as conditions shift—whether a new adversary capability appears, a different tactic is tested, or a partner nation adjusts its posture. The DTA keeps commanders informed about who poses the most immediate risk, how that risk evolves, and what countermeasures might be needed. Because threats don’t stand still, neither does the assessment. It’s a living guide that prompts adjustments in timing, planning, and resource allocation.

Annex B: Intelligence

If you’ve ever opened a planning document and noticed a section labeled Annex B, you know it’s not filler. Annex B: Intelligence is the backbone that spells out what information is required, what capabilities exist to gather it, and how the intelligence effort will support decision-making at every level. It maps intelligence requirements to sources, tasks, and timelines. In short, Annex B translates strategic questions into concrete intelligence actions and ensures that the joint force has the right information—when and where it’s needed—to make informed decisions.

National Intelligence Support Plan (NISP)

A joint operation isn’t just about what any single service or coalition partner can provide. It’s about how national-level intelligence assets—satellites, sensors, human intelligence networks, analytical centers—can be synchronized to support a mission. The National Intelligence Support Plan lays out how national capabilities plug into the operation, who coordinates them, what data-sharing protocols apply, and how risks are managed if national resources become constrained. It’s the bridge between national intelligence sovereignty and joint operational needs, making sure the whole system can mobilize in a coherent, timely fashion.

How these products work together in the planning cycle

The three outputs don’t compete for attention; they complement one another. Here’s the flow in a nutshell:

• Start with the big questions. What’s the mission? What are the critical decision points? What information would change a course of action?

• Build the DTA in parallel with early planning. As you hypothesize threats and contingencies, you test how robust your options are against changing risks.

• Develop Annex B to translate those information needs into a concrete plan for collection, analysis, and dissemination. This keeps intelligence activities aligned with operational plans.

• Craft the NISP to ensure national resources can support the plan. You map assets, establish coordination channels, and set expectations for data sharing and support timelines.

• Iterate. As the scenario evolves—maybe a new threat appears or a partner nation offers additional support—the DTA updates, Annex B revises intelligence requirements, and the NISP adjusts the mix of available assets. The end result isn’t a static document; it’s a dynamic, living framework.

A practical lens: why this matters on the ground

Let’s anchor this with a concrete, if hypothetical, scenario. Suppose a joint operation aims to stabilize a volatile region with multiple actors, shifting loyalties, and cyber-enabled challenges. Here’s how the three outputs come into play:

• The DTA keeps monitoring who’s threatening the operation in real time. If a previously quiet faction ramps up its activities, the DTA’s new threat indicators trigger changes in the convoy routes, timing of joint patrols, or the need for additional air support. It’s the warning bell that nudges planners to adapt rather than react late.

• Annex B: Intelligence is the map for what the commanders need to know. It tells analysts what questions to answer: what capabilities do adversaries have? where are their supply lines? what indicators will signal a shift in intent? With that clarity, intelligence assets—human sources, sensors, open-source data, and partnerships—can focus on the gaps that truly matter.

• The NISP ensures you’re not staring at a wall when national assets could help. If a national satellite system could illuminate a denied area, the NISP lays out the process for requesting access, who approving it, and how the data will flow to the joint command. It also anticipates potential bottlenecks, such as bandwidth limits or legal or policy constraints, so you’re not scrambling at a critical moment.

A few practical notes you’ll hear in the halls

• These products aren’t checkboxes. They’re tools that shape decisions at key junctures. The DTA informs risk acceptance; Annex B clarifies what intelligence is needed to reduce uncertainty; the NISP makes sure national support is ready and available when called upon.

• They’re not static artifacts. The intelligence picture changes; so do the plans that depend on it. The beauty of the joint approach is that all three are designed to be updated in a coordinated way.

• They support coordination across domains. Air, land, maritime, cyber, and space—these outputs help synchronize actions across all domains, which is essential when every decision can ripple through the entire operation.

Common questions you’ll hear from partners

• Do these outputs duplicate effort? Not really. They share a common purpose—maintaining situational awareness and guiding action—but each one serves a distinct function. DTA tracks evolving threats; Annex B codifies what intelligence is needed; NISP aligns national assets with the plan.

• Are they only for big operations? Not at all. Even smaller joint efforts rely on solid intelligence planning. The same framework scales: you tailor the depth of the DTA, you define essential requirements in Annex B, and you map available national assets in the NISP.

• Are they set in stone once written? No. The battlefield changes, and so should the plan. The real strength lies in disciplined updates and clear communication channels among planners, intelligence professionals, and operators.

Learning how to think about these outputs

If you want to internalize how these pieces fit, try a simple mental model. Picture a concert:

• The DTA is the conductor’s baton, signaling tempo and intensity based on the crowd’s mood and the orchestra’s performance. It adjusts the tempo as new notes (threats) arrive.

• Annex B is the score for the musicians, detailing what information they need to perform well—where to listen, what to play, when to shift dynamics.

• The NISP is the backstage crew, ensuring all the instruments and technicians (national assets) are in place, ready to support the performance on cue.

In other words, intelligence planning is a team sport. It’s about making sure the right information is collected, interpreted, and delivered at the right moment, while ensuring national resources can join the effort when needed.

A few takeaways for students and learners

• Memorize the trio: Dynamic Threat Assessment, Annex B: Intelligence, National Intelligence Support Plan. Each is a pillar; together they support the whole operation.

• Understand the flow. Threat assessment informs what you seek to know; the intelligence annex specifies how you’ll get and use that knowledge; the national plan ensures outside resources are ready to backfill gaps.

• Think in cycles. Planning, executing, learning, and re-planning—this is the rhythm that keeps a joint operation nimble and credible.

• Don’t fear the big picture. It’s tempting to get lost in the details, but the value comes from how these pieces align with mission goals and real-world constraints.

Bringing it home

Joint intelligence planning isn’t about clever jargon or long documents. It’s a practical, dynamic approach that helps commanders see the battlefield more clearly, decide with greater confidence, and act with coherence across partners and domains. When you’re asked which products may result from joint intelligence planning, remember: All of the above. DTA, Annex B, and NISP together create a robust, responsive intelligence framework that supports timely decisions and effective action.

If you’re curious to explore deeper, consider how these pieces behave under pressure. How quickly can a DTA adapt if an unexpected threat emerges? How might Annex B need to pivot if a new ally provides critical sources of information? What happens when national assets are strained or restricted—how does the NISP adjust to keep the operation supported?

The answers aren’t just theoretical. They’re the difference between a plan that sits in a file and a plan that moves with the operation, keeping pace with evolving threats and changing opportunities. And that, in turn, is at the heart of why the joint approach matters—because in modern military science, intelligence and operations aren’t separate gears; they’re the same engine, tuned to the mission, running on the same track, toward a shared goal.