Flagship programme
ROSSAD Operator
Programme.
Plan a defined intelligence enquiry, assess sources and defend your judgement under supervision.
First cohort in preparation
Register your interestThe purpose
of the programme.
Develop the research, source-handling and analytical skills needed to contribute to private intelligence work. Follow a controlled investigation involving company records, source accounts and an unverified request for information, from the initial brief to a documented assessment and an oral briefing.
An operator, in this programme, is a practitioner entrusted with a defined part of an investigation. You bring together open-source research, source conversations, operational security and analysis. You practise choosing proportionate checks, protecting the material and explaining what your findings support. The intended level is supervised work on a clearly scoped assignment.
The proposed format involves 32–40 hours overall, including live sessions and independent study. The written cohort brief will confirm the dates, timetable, teaching team and fees before you book.
Who it is for
- Analysts, researchers and security professionals developing a practical investigation capability.
- People moving into intelligence work who can research carefully, write clearly and explain their reasoning.
- Professionals who want to contribute to a defined investigation under an agreed brief.
You should be comfortable conducting research in English, working with documents and spreadsheets, and explaining your reasoning. You will need a laptop, an up-to-date browser and time for the weekly assignments. Any additional tools, accounts or costs will be identified before booking.
What you will practise
- Translate a client's decision into a research plan with priorities, boundaries and a clear stopping point.
- Resolve identities and relationships without treating an uncertain match as an established fact.
- Verify digital material and maintain source records, original files and a supported chronology.
- Conduct a neutral source conversation and distinguish direct knowledge from inference or hearsay.
- Use AI to assist research while checking material claims, protecting sensitive information and recording its contribution.
- Deliver and defend a concise assessment that distinguishes evidence, assumptions, likelihood and analytical confidence.
From brief
to assessment.
Each week adds a practical output to one continuing training case. You revise earlier work as new evidence emerges.
- 01
Frame the assignment
Define the client's decision, prioritise the questions and agree the legitimate purpose, scope and handling arrangements. Establish when the available evidence will be sufficient to brief the client.
Practical output A one-page brief, research plan and initial assessment of risks.
- 02
Find and evaluate sources
Trace material claims to their original source. Distinguish direct knowledge, an intermediary's account and repeated reporting. Assess independence, currency and gaps. Check any AI-assisted claims against the underlying records.
Practical output A source register, claim log and record of AI-assisted work.
- 03
Resolve people and companies
Compare names, identifiers, business roles and dates. Examine ownership and professional relationships, account for changes over time and test alternative identity matches.
Practical output A relationship map with supporting sources and unresolved matches marked clearly.
- 04
Verify and preserve digital material
Check the origin, date and context of supplied documents and image-context records. Preserve original files, capture times and working copies. Examine the limits of metadata and provenance, including what they cannot establish about a claim.
Practical output A verification record and an indexed evidence folder with integrity checks.
- 05
Conduct a source conversation
Prepare a structured conversation, invite the source's account and explore inconsistencies through neutral questions. Establish direct knowledge, interests and limitations, then record what requires independent verification.
Practical output A conversation plan, source note and independent verification priorities.
- 06
Protect the enquiry
Assess exposure before approaching a source. Practise separating research accounts and working environments, controlling access and sharing material safely. Apply rules for data minimisation, retention and approved AI services, including checks for malicious instructions in retrieved material.
Practical output An information-handling plan and a recorded response to a simulated exposure.
- 07
Test the assessment
Compare credible explanations against the evidence, including material that challenges your initial view. Distinguish an event's likelihood from confidence in your assessment. Identify the assumptions and further checks that could change the recommendation.
Practical output A chronology, alternative explanations and a draft decision brief.
- 08
Brief, defend and revise
Present the material findings, limitations and recommended next steps. Respond to questions, examine a new piece of evidence and revise your conclusion where warranted.
Practical output A complete training dossier, a two-page decision brief and a revised assessment.
The method
behind the work.
Research, source conversations and analysis are taught as connected parts of one enquiry. The following references inform specific tasks in the proposed programme.
- 01
Intelligence assessment
PHIA Common Analytical Standards
Separate information from assumptions, compare explanations and state uncertainty. In the case brief, identify the evidence supporting each material judgement and what would change it.
In practiceAn explanation worksheet and a revised decision brief.
- 02
Source conversations
PEACE and selected OARS skills
Adapt PEACE's five-stage structure to a voluntary source conversation. Use open questions, reflective listening and summaries to clarify the account and its limits.
In practiceAn observed role-play, a source note and independent checking priorities.
- 03
Digital verification and preservation
Selected Berkeley Protocol principles
Examine a record's origin and context, retain originals and document the checks. File integrity and provenance are considered alongside what the content actually establishes.
In practiceA retrievable evidence index and a verification record.
These are adaptations for a defined, supervised training assignment. The programme does not confer investigative interviewing accreditation or establish full compliance with the referenced frameworks. Black Chamber is independently developed by ROSSAD. We adapt selected principles to controlled training exercises. The referenced organisations do not accredit or endorse our programmes.
How the learning works
- 01
See the reasoning
Complete an opening task, then examine worked examples. The facilitator explains the checks, rejected interpretations and limits of the evidence.
- 02
Apply, review and improve
Build the case through weekly assignments. Revisit earlier decisions and apply specific feedback to the next stage.
- 03
Explain and revise
Present your dossier, locate the supporting records and respond to new evidence during an individual review. One revision is included.
How the methods become practical skills
Learning objectives, exercises and review criteria are linked. Demonstrations lead into practice, specific feedback and a further attempt or revision appropriate to the programme.
- Biggs: constructive alignment (opens in a new tab)
- Carnegie Mellon: teaching principles (opens in a new tab)
The references inform the teaching design. They do not establish measured learning outcomes for Black Chamber.
The practical assignment
A case dossier
you can defend.
Work through a fictional investigation into a technology supplier with conflicting project claims, company records and source accounts. Plan your enquiries, resolve the entities, conduct a supervised source conversation and respond to an unverified request for information. Submit an indexed case dossier and a two-page decision brief. Explain your recommendation and revise it when a new document changes the evidence.
How your work is reviewed
The assessment considers the quality of the evidence trail and your reasoning, including how you respond when information changes. Each required criterion must be demonstrated for the defined supervised task. Written feedback identifies any work to revise; one revision is included in the proposed format.
What the review considers
- Material findings can be traced to identified sources and preserved records.
- Identity matches are supported and unresolved matches remain explicit.
- Source conversations separate direct knowledge, inference and hearsay.
- Alternative explanations, uncertainty and contrary evidence are addressed.
- Information handling and the use of AI comply with the agreed brief.
- The research plan and briefing address the client's question, support a proportionate recommendation and respond to new evidence.
Practice and future opportunities
Motivated participants can discuss supervised practice and relevant work opportunities according to their results, interests and available assignments. Any collaboration with ROSSAD is considered separately and requires its own agreement; a place on the programme does not guarantee employment.
AI and digital material
AI, used
with judgement.
AI is a research aid within an accountable workflow. You remain responsible for the sources, analysis and final recommendation.
- Use approved tools to organise material, assist translation and compare claims; record which outputs influenced your work.
- Verify material claims and citations against the underlying sources. Treat instructions embedded in retrieved material as untrusted content, and check identity claims through independent records.
- Keep client material and personal information within the agreed handling arrangements. Check AI-assisted translations against the original where meaning affects a judgement.
Selected NIST generative AI risk guidance informs the exercises on unsupported outputs, sensitive information and malicious retrieved instructions.
Programme lead
Madars Balodis
ROSSAD / Black Chamber
Madars leads Black Chamber. His experience includes military communications, cyber security and professional teaching. Your written programme brief confirms who teaches and reviews the work for your group.
About ROSSADDiscuss your
next step.
Tell us about your background, the work you want to do and your availability. We will discuss suitability and share the first-cohort proposal when it is ready.
Your objectives, programme scope and full commercial terms are agreed before booking.