UNClASS\f\W

-c,

UNITED

"

HE~mS

"A(\:jl

STATES /.IILlTA: .....

(-,
A~O

MACJOI

S S. I(,CE

COMMAND.

VIETNAM

o o a z a ...

.,

12 December

1970

MEMORANDUl\1
SUBJECT:.

1.

AND FA CT SHEET

PAAS

Percentae:e

2.

(November)

FOR:

Results:

of RcsDondcnts

AM BASSADOR

Phung

Aware

CObB Y

Hoang

of Phung

Hoang

(Tab

41-1).

a.

The upper grap.h indicates

the awareness
of Phung
centage
f r o rn January
through
No v c rn b c r ,

b.

The lower graph is an index created

by subtracting
the percentage
of r e s po nd c nt s not aware of the program
from the percentage
of
those who arc aware.
The trend is substantial
improvement.

Effectiveness

Incle:x

a.

left

The

upper

aware

for

Phune: Hoane:

bar

graph

shows

the

of Phung Ho ang ) between

success,

to t h

as opposed

(Tab

Hoang

as a per-

41-2.).

c o rn p a r is o n (for

those

who are

tho s e who r at c it as having

who rate

it as having

little

some

or no

The lower left graph indicates

the percentage
of respondents
of Phung Ho s.n g who have no opinion as to i.ts effectiveness.

aware

c.

The line graph to the right is an index created

percentage
of respondents
rating
Phung Hoang
the pe
ti
it as
ffe
i

the
from

nt

ng

ct

by subtracting
as ineffective

",'

3. November
PAAS Data:
A t ot a l of 1,134 respondents
in 234 hamlets
(rated
A through
D) were a s k e d if they werc aware
of the Phung Hoang
Pr og raro,
:

a.

b.

,~

,I

.50. 7 percent

were unaware

(or so stated)/
. OASD(PA)
. '!UP ~RE'J:~

DECLASSIFIED BY:
DECLASSIFIED ON:

.-(

MI\CJOI TI
SU DJ ECT:

PI\J\S (Novembe

bt~:~.8.9

percent

(bro~cn

r ) TI

C!J U

It s:

Phung

down as follows)

Ho an g
were

aware

of the progran11

- 30. 3 percent;

a p r o g r a rn to c l i rn ina t c c n e rn y inf r a= s t r u c t u r c ,

- 13.0

an anti-Viet

percent,

Cong program.

,
- 5.6

perccnt,

a program

Of those aw a r e of Phung Hoang,

as to p r-o g r arn effectiveness,
a.
'.,'

C..\
./

b.

,85. 5 percent
(broken
Phung Hoang.'

for
497

fighting

Viet

respondents

down as follows)

Congo
were

indicated

- 31. 7 percent,

successfully

c lirn i riat i ng Viet

- 15,4

percent,

successfully

eliminating

. - 38.4

percent,

s o m e success.

,11.4 percent

-i ndi c at e d little

asked

for opinions

effectiveness

Cong infra-structure.

the Viet

Cong forces

or no s uc c e s.s

;f~.u,{s~L
FRANI<: W. SCOTTOH
Executive
Assistant

1
-

1
J

(1

:.

.-.r_--r~"

,'.:..,,~
----------~~--

--------

...

of I

--- ...-~--.-"

---

_ ..__ .

'..

OF P~-:iUNG ~--JOD.f0~G

A"lVA~E~~ESS

or=

PEiNCENYD..GE
WHO

HAVE

f~'~'

. -4
100 -c:;"

'

R(;:SPOt\'lD~NjjS

AT LEAST

SOn..":E AV'JARENESS

"A';

'

.;.;.

::"

"

OF PHUNG

HOANG

.::::::,

.>

=;

80

PROGRAM
"

60

I.;~.,.._,=,~.~,"~~~.,
. '.
. _~.~".

40

,.

_~'_

20

49
~~_".

~ _.~-",,_."'_

-rI

.JAN

',"

.. II ..

FEB

',.:.:..:.!.....

l"u1AR

APR

r";,"1

AV

-----\(PERCENTAGE
SOME

EXTENT

OF RESPONDC:[,~TS
LESS

-40

..., ....... -x~ ... -.--.

-:r ----- 'J

-T"
AU G

'.'O!.

OCT

SEP

t:'P.-rS DilREr~ESS

--.~

-il

//

-+-"
-.-<:.w--- ..~-:::c~.--'~:;/
;~ .::.:::-:::::-::-:=-

- ..--;~

.... -~~~~~~7

~---~-T--;-""r.-;---T

DEe

NOV

NOT AWARE)

-2 . .,

.>

::CC:=:-O-=i'=---"-'"' .1.::,-:-:. '~'~-' 'f"~---I

I

...~

TO AT LEAST

INDICA:rING

L.=:=-_--:::.:
1 ...- ..-.
-----1._
J-~-l- -'.....
-~---l
:::"1I

ENDEJt

INDIC'ATBNG A\,'VD.RENESS

"*-

I:

---:-:-::::::=:======:::::;:::_......-:-...::::=-.c====-~=-_~"

~.

UL

'f

,.

\. . ~

PERCEr~TAGE OF RESPONDENTS

-{-

i'

-'"

J'

--~-~-----:--==.==---.:.-~----=--=.
, '''.'~~

+10

-20

..I ---..:..' .

'" UN'"

P~-5U fi'JG E~On~,~G

-30

,_"
y.>:/'

,.
J
'.
'r"'"'""'--'""'~""r'~"'"

[. ,'..
'I'~
'--W'

Ah"'~ ,,-/<>

~.J

)_" j~

o _~ ...t,

(.:,

~,-""<ll"-",,':'m'" l-,w,N
.,r.-YC'iI""7.~,
,,,-,=~,"
"",WO'

. .,,~::' ::.-n.~";{>l?A"ll;:!c~'
-.-.c.J'~~'->~I'"<'.~~

---

~::t~I.:,

;.

~
,

,,

I
SUCCESSFUL
0/0

100

EFFECTBVENESS

86

80

OF
PHUi."JG

56

60

n
L
25

20-J~

r::

'I
I
j i'l
~l
L.LJ l.l :
,J

44
40,

20

nil

) , . '

[~.

I'.

""

r:

,':/ "').,.' "

~.

% OF RESPONDENTS
PHUNG

10

,r\., .:,..

r<vn~

Ib:'

t:.===;:u:c=:s:--"

r.1AR

c:

SUCCESS

LESS

PHUNG

HOANG

INDICATING
IS HAVING

LITTLE OR

SUCCESS

OCT

NOV

NO OPINION

%
80

80

71

69

48

~r
~

37

40-;:-

ri

21

20

I
o

~'I ..1.....!t l-L. f.~'-""""""-r---'-""'-

~_",
~

I\,AR

,JUN

75

Got

60

SOME

15 HAVING

~.*,,*" :1" ==(=s= ...

==n::J

SEP

JUN

PROGRAM

% OF RESPONDENTS

11

NO
OR NO SUCCESS

HOANG

AT LEAST

20-r
LITTLE

INDICATING

".y:,
r"1.
.

t;.t.;

"('-''0

r- ,:r

INDEX

EFFECTIVENESS

-L I
-L'
1"""-.rL,.,,;..'r-r-a.:\~'r-r~~":;.;r---..:y~,:,
.s:
-:-''-r-V
~""'\~
~',C,I(;I'
~,~
1
"

I-,,,.."Cli ""
..

HOANG

i .1.J.........r-l
.
3 __

l .:..L_
1

SEP

",'-'

, T-'-~-~-OCT

NOV

~~
~~

o c..:..:~
MAR

....

1~~;

: .:;;,'

JUN

,'=::
SEP

':1

,:;z. f '. ::,r. "i:! f

OCT

NOV