Back Matter

Back Matter

Author(s):
International Monetary Fund. Independent Evaluation Office
Published Date:
August 2014
    Share
    • ShareShare
    Show Summary Details

    Sources Consulted

    IEO evaluations:
    Other IEO documents:
    IMF documents:

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2002, “Summing Up by the Acting Chair: Evaluation by the Independent Evaluation Office of Prolonged Use of IMF Resources,BUFF/02/164, September25 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2003a, “Conclusions of the Task Force on Prolonged Use of Fund Resources,SM/03/46, February5; BUFF/03/51, April8 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2003b, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up Review of Access Policy Under the Credit Tranches and the Extended Fund Facility, and Access Policy in Capital Account Crises—Modifications to the Supplemental Reserve Facility and Follow-Up Issues Related to Exceptional Access Policy,BUFF/03/28, March5 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2003c, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up: Evaluation of the Role of the Fund in Recent Capital Account Crises: Report by the Independent Evaluation Office,BUFF/03/125, July23 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2003d, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up: Evaluation Report on Fiscal Adjustment in IMF-Supported Programs by the Independent Evaluation Office,BUFF/03/161, September4 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2004a, “Review of Technical Assistance,SM/04/41, February17 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2004b, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up: Evaluation Report of Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) and the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) by the Independent Evaluation Office, BUFF/04/142, July27 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2004c, “The Chairman’s Summing Up: Independent Evaluation Office Report on the Role of the Fund in Argentina, 1991–2001,BUFF/04/141, July27 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2004d, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up: Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers—Progress in Implementation,BUFF/04/175, September3 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2004e, “Review Process,Office Memorandum from the First Deputy Managing Director, October18 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2004f, “The Design of Fund-Supported Programs—Overview,SM/04/403, November24 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2005a, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up: Independent Evaluation Office—Evaluation of the Technical Assistance Provided by the Fund,BUFF/05/37, March2 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2005b, “Review of 2002 Conditionality Guidelines,SM/05/81, March4; BUFF/05/59, April1 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2005c, “Surveillance Guidance Note,SM/05/156, May9 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2005d, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up: IEO Report on the Evaluation of the IMF’s Approach to Capital Account Liberalization,BUFF/05/79, May16 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2005e, “Policy Support and Signaling in Low Income Countries,EBS/05/87, June10; BUFF/05/131, August2 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2005f, “Conclusions of the Task Force on IMF Technical Assistance,SM/05/269, July13; BUFF/05/130, August11 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2005g, “Draft Report of the Managing Director on the Fund’s Medium Term Strategy,SM/05/332, August23 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2005h, “Jordan—Staff Report for the 2005 Article IV Consultation and Second Post-Program Monitoring Discussions,EBS/05/154, November2 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2005i, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up: Independent Evaluation Office—An Evaluation of IMF Support to Jordan, 1989–2004,BUFF/05/192, November23 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2005j, “Staff Guidance Note on the Policy Support Instrument,SM/05/428, December24 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2006a, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up: Independent Evaluation Office—Evaluation of the Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP),BUFF/06/20, February2 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2006b, “Review of Ex Post Assessments and Issues Related to Longer-Term Program Engagement,SM/06/115, March21; BUFF/06/95, May17 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2006c, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up: Independent Evaluation Office—An Evaluation of the IMF’s Multilateral Surveillance,BUFF/06/58, March29 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007a, “Report of the Taskforce on Integrating Finance and Financial Sector Analysis into Article IV Surveillance,SM/07/57, February9 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007b, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up: Independent Evaluation Office—the IMF and Aid to Sub-Saharan Africa,BUFF/07/32, March9 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007c, “The Chairman’s Summing Up: IEO Report on the Evaluation of the IMF Exchange Rate Policy Advice, 1999–2005,BUFF/07/71, May15 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007d, “The IMF’s Communication Strategy,SM/07/192, May30; BUFF/07/92, June27 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007e, “Implementation Plan in Response to Board-Endorsed Recommendations Arising from the Independent Evaluation Office Report on The IMF and Aid to Sub-Saharan Africa,SM/07/198, June5 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multiheader.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007f, “Fiscal Policy Response to Scaled-Up Aid; Aid Inflows—The Role of the Fund and Operational Issues for Program Design,SM/07/199, June7; BUFF/07/102, July12 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007g, “Bilateral Surveillance Over Member Countries,DEC/13919, June15 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007h, “Implementing the 2007 Surveillance Decision—Interim Guidance Note,SM/07/228, June28 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007i, “Setting Out Surveillance Priorities,SM/07/277, July27; BUFF/07/124, September10 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007j, “Implementation Plan in Response to Board-Endorsed Recommendations Arising from the IEO Report on The Evaluation of IMF Exchange Rate Policy Advice, 1999–2005,SM/07/297, August16 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multiheader.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007k, “Assessing Underlying Vulnerabilities and Crisis Risks in Emerging Market Countries—A New Approach,SM/07/328, September17 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007l, “The Role of the Fund in the Poverty Reduction Strategy Process and Its Collaboration with Donors,SM/07/334, September21; BUFF/07/139, October10 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007m, “Enhancing Career Development at the Fund,Paper prepared by an Interdepartmental Working Group, October18 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007n, “Periodic Monitoring Report on the Status of Board-Endorsed IEO Recommendations and Management Implementation Plans,SM/07/383, December3 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multiheader.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007o, “The Chair’s Summing Up: IEO Evaluation of Structural Conditionality in IMF-Supported Programs,BUFF/07/171, December18 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2008a, “Reform of Quota and Voice in the International Monetary Fund—Report of the Executive Board to the Board of Governors,SM/08/83, Sup. 1, March21 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2008b, “Statement by the Managing Director on Strategic Directions in the Medium-Term Budget,BUFF/08/27, March25 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2008c, “Implementation Plan in Response to Board-Endorsed Recommendations Arising from the IEO Evaluation of Structural Conditionality in IMF-Supported Programs,SM/08/104, April8 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multiheader.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2008d, “Enhancing the Impact of Fund Technical Assistance,SM/08/97, April13; BUFF/08/64, May20 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2008e, “Joint Statement by the Executive Board and the Managing Director on the Report by the Independent Evaluation Office on the Evaluation of Aspects of IMF Corporate Governance—Including the Role of the Executive Board,Press Release No. 08/121, May27 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2008f, “The Role of the Fund in Low-Income Countries,SM/08/170, June16; BUFF/08/127, August1 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2008g, “Revisions to the Operational Guidance Note on Conditionality,SM/08/245, July14 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2008h, “Application of Structural Conditionality—2008 Annual Report,SM/08/246, July14 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2008i, “2008 Triennial Surveillance Review—Overview Paper,SM/08/287, September2; SUR/08/104, October8 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2008j, “Report of the Executive Board Working Group on IMF Corporate Governance,Office Memorandum from the Secretary to the Executive Board, FO/ DIS/08/84, September9; BUFF/08/147, October6 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2008k, “Statement of Surveillance Priorities,SM/08/316, October6; DEC/14182, October17 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2008l, “Periodic Monitoring Report on the Status of Implementation Plans in Response to Board-Endorsed IEO Recommendations,SM/08/318, October6 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multi-header.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009a, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up: IEO Evaluation of IMF Interactions with Member Countries,BUFF/10/2, January8, 2010 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009b, “Guidelines for New Review Process,Internal Memorandum, January15 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009c, “Integrating Financial Sector Issues and FSAP Assessments into Surveillance—Progress Report,SM/09/15, January16 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009d, “The Fund-FSF Early Warning Exercise: Proposed Procedure,SM/09/17, January21; BUFF/ 09/26, February13 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009e, “Joint Staff Advisory Notes—Amendments to Streamline Modalities 2009,DEC/14253, January27 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009f, “Initial Lessons of the Crisis,SM/09/37, February6 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009g, “GRA Lending Toolkit and Conditionality-Reform Proposals,SM/09/69, March13; BUFF/09/50, March27 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009h, “Modification of Access Policies for the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility and the Exogenous Shocks Facility,SM/09/89, April10; BUFF/09/67, April20 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009i, “Financial Sector Surveillance Guidance Note,SM/09/114, April24 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009J, “The 2007 Surveillance Decision—Revised Operational Guidance,SM/09/123, May1 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009k, “Fiscal Implications of the Global Economic and Financial Crisis,SPN/09/13, June9 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009l, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up: IEO Evaluation of IMF Involvement in Trade Policy Issues,BUFF/09/91, June11 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009m, “A New Architecture of Facilities for Low-Income Countries,SM/09/160, June26 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009n, “Toward a Stable System of Exchange Rates,FO/DIS/09/112, July6 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009o, “A New Architecture of Facilities for Low-Income Countries and Reform of the Fund’s Concessional Financing Framework—Proposed Decision,SM/09/189, July13; BUFF/09/131, July28 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009p, “Omnibus Paper on Easing Work Pressures,SM/09/213, August5; DEC/A/13207, August28 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009q, “The IMF-FSF Early Warning Exercise: Further Steps,SM/09/214, August5; BUFF/09/149, September8 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009r, “Financial Sector and Bilateral Surveillance—Toward Further Integration,SM/09/230, August28; BUFF/09/159, September24 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009s, “Financial Sector Assessment Program after Ten Years—Experience and Reforms for the Next Decade,SM/09/231, August28; BUFF/09/159, September24 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009t, “Creating Policy Space—Responsive Design and Streamlined Conditionality in Recent Low-Income Country Programs,SM/09/244, September10; BUFF/09/163, September28 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009u, “Statement of Surveillance Priorities—Revisions of Economic Priorities and Progress on Operational Priorities,SM/09/235, September30; DEC/14436, October3 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009v, “Third Periodic Monitoring Report on the Status of Implementation Plans in Response to Board-Endorsed IEO Recommendations,SM/09/261, October7 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multiheader.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009w, “Bilateral Surveillance Guidance Note,SM/09/265, October28 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009x, “Implementation Plan in Response to Board-Endorsed Recommendations Arising from the IEO Evaluation of IMF Involvement in International Trade Policy Issues,SM/09/275, November13 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multiheader.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010a, “Operational Guidance Note on Conditionality—December 2009 Revisions,SM/10/22, Rev. 1, January27 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010b, “Ex Post Assessments of Members with a Longer-Term Program Engagement—Revised Guidance Note,SM/10/45, March1 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010c, “Application of Structural Conditionality—2009 Annual Report,SM/10/57, March10 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010d, “Financial Sector Surveillance and the Mandate of the Fund,SM/10/75, March29; BUFF/10/51, April20 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010e, “Implementation Plan in Response to Board-Endorsed Recommendations Arising from the IEO Evaluation of IMF Interactions with Member Countries,SM/10/141, May27 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multiheader.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010f, “Compendium of Executive Board Work Procedures,EBD/10/33, June2 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010g, “Integrating Stability Assessments Under the Financial Sector Assessment Program into Article IV Surveillance,SM/10/235, August31; DEC/14736, September21 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010h, “Reference Note on Trade in Financial Services,SM/10/239, September7 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010i, “Reference Note on Trade Policy, Preferential Trade Agreements, and WTO Consistency,SM/10/260, October1 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010j, “IMF Quota and Governance Reform—Elements of an Agreement,SM/10/293, October31; BUFF/10/155, November4 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010k, “Financial Sector Assessment Program Procedures Manual,November (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010l, “Executive Board Working Group on Committees—Report on Board Practices,FO/DIS/10/223, Rev.1, November16 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010m, “Supplement to the Implementation Plan in Response to Board-Endorsed Recommendations on the IEO Evaluation of IMF Interactions with Member Countries,SM/10/311, Supplement 1, December10 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multiheader.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2010n, “Technical Updates to the Surveillance Guidance Note,SM/10/324, December27 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011a, “2011 Review of Conditionality and the Design of Fund-Supported Programs—Concept Note,FO/DIS/11/15, January21 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011b, “The Chairman’s Summing Up: IEO Evaluation of IMF Performance in the Run-Up to the Financial and Economic Crisis,BUFF/11/21, January31 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011c, “Assessing Reserve Adequacy,SM/11/31,February15; BUFF/11/40, March9 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011d, “Entry into Force of the Voice and Participation Amendment (Sixth Amendment) of the Fund’s Articles of Agreement—Key Features and Implications,SM/11/44, March3 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011e, “Managing Volatility—A Vulnerability Exercise for Low-Income Countries,FO/DIS/11/44, March10 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011f, “Recent Experiences in Managing Capital Inflows—Cross-Cutting Themes and Possible Policy Framework,SM/11/30, March11; BUFF/11/50, March31 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011g, “Recent Experiences in Managing Capital Inflows—Cross-Cutting Themes and Possible Policy Framework—Supplementary Information,SM/11/30, Supplement 1, March11 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011h, “Fourth Periodic Monitoring Report on the Status of Implementation Plans in Response to Board-Endorsed IEO Recommendations,SM/11/52, March11 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multiheader.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011i, “2011 Triennial Surveillance Review—External Report on Interviews with Country Authorities,SM/11/241, May15 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011j, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up: IEO Evaluation of Research at the IMF—Relevance and Utilization,BUFF/11/89, June16 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011k, “Working Group Report on Increasing the Effectiveness of Staff in the Field,Staff Memorandum to Management, June24 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011l, “Terms of Appointment of Christine Lagarde as Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund,Press Release No. 11/270, July5 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011m, “Consolidated Spillover Report—Implications from the Analysis of the Systemic-5,FO/DIS/11/140, July11 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011n, “2011 Triennial Surveillance Review—External Study—an Evaluation of IMF Surveillance of the Euro Area,SM/11/238, July19 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011o, “2011 Triennial Surveillance Review—External Study—IMF Surveillance—Coverage, Consistency and Coherence,SM/11/239, July20 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011p, “2011 Triennial Surveillance Review—External Commentary—A Short Note on Surveillance and How Reforms in Surveillance Can Help the IMF to Promote Global Financial Stability,SM/11/237, July22 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011q, “2011 Triennial Surveillance Review—External Study—IMF and Global Financial Stability,SM/11/240, July25 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011r, “Modernizing the Framework for Fiscal Policy and Public Debt Sustainability Analysis,SM/11/211, August 8; BUFF/11/121, September2 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011s, “2011 Triennial Surveillance Review—External Commentary—Surveillance by the International Monetary Fund,SM/11/236, August15 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011t, “2011 Triennial Surveillance Review—Review of 2007 Surveillance Decision and the Broader Legal Framework for Surveillance,SM/11/234, August26 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011u, “2011 Triennial Surveillance Review—Staff Background Studies,SM/11/235, August26 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011v, “Consolidated Multilateral Surveillance Report,SM/11/256, Rev.1, September20 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011w, “2011 Triennial Surveillance Review—Overview Paper,SM/11/233, August29; BUFF/11/139, October28 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011x, “2011 Triennial Surveillance Review—Report of the External Advisory Group,SM/11/243, August31 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011y, “Report of the Task Force on the Fund’s Technical Assistance Strategy,SM/11/282, October21; BUFF/11/144, November16 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012a, “Implementation Plan in Response to Board-Endorsed Recommendations for the IEO Evaluation of IMF Performance in the Run-Up to the Financial and Economic Crisis,SM/12/31, February14 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multiheader.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012b, “Enhancing Surveillance—Interconnectedness and Clusters,FO/DIS/12/37, March15 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012c, “Consolidated Multilateral Surveillance Report,SM/12/80, Rev. 1, April17 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012d, “Review of the Experience with the Board Practices Reform,FO/DIS/12/76, May16 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012e, “2011 Review of Conditionality—Overview Paper,SM/12/148, June19; PIN/12/109, September17 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012f, “Modernizing the Legal Framework for Surveillance—an Integrated Surveillance Decision,SM/12/156, June26; DEC/15203, July18 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012g, “Pilot External Sector Report,SM/12/166, July2 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012h, “2012 Spillover Report,SM/12/181, July9 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012i, “Review of Facilities for Low-Income Countries,SM/12/203, July26; PIN/12/108, September13 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012j, “The IMF’s Financial Surveillance Strategy,SM/12/231, August29; BUFF/12/106, September21 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012k, “Fifth Periodic Monitoring Report on the Status of Implementation Plans in Response to Board-Endorsed IEO Recommendations,SM/12/248, September24 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multiheader.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012l, “The Liberalization and Management of Capital Flows—An Institutional View,SM/12/250, October5; BUFF/12/125, November16 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012m, “Guidance Note for Article IV Consultations,SM/12/246, Rev. 1, October11 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012n, “Implementation Plan in Response to Board-Endorsed Recommendations for the IEO Evaluation of Research at the IMF—Relevance and Utilization,SM/12/277, October23 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multiheader.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012o, “One Year after the 2011 Triennial Surveillance Report—Progress Report,SM/12/267, November5 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012p, “The Acting Chair’s Summing Up: International Reserves—IMF Concerns and Country Perspectives,BUFF/12/132, December17 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013a, “The Chairman’s Summing Up: The Role of the IMF as Trusted Advisor,BUFF/13/14, February12 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013b, “Report of the Executive Directors’ Working Group on Summings Up,FO/DIS/12/43, February20, (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013c, “Review of Facilities for Low-Income Countries—Proposals for Implementation,SM/13/77, March18; BUFF/13/31, April11 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013d, “Statement by the Managing Director on the External Evaluation of the IEO—Executive Board Meeting—March 21, 2013,BUFF/13/22, March14 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013e, “Implementation Plan in Response to Board-Endorsed Recommendations for the IEO Evaluation of International Reserves—IMF Concerns and Country Perspectives,SM/13/79, March21 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multiheader.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013f, “Guidance Note for the Liberalization and Management of Capital Flows,SM/13/80, April23 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013g, FSAP Procedures, May (Washington). Available at: http://www-intranet.irnf.org/departments/MCM/fss/Pages/FSAP.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013h, “Staff Guidance Note for Public Debt Sustainability Analysis in Market-Access Countries,SM/13/86, Rev. 1, May13 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013i, “2013 Review of the Fund’s Transparency Policy,SM/13/115, May16; DEC/15420, June24 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013j, “The Fund’s Capacity Development Strategy—Better Strategy through Stronger Institutions,SM/13/128, May22; BUFF/13/57, June25 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013k, “Implementation Plan in Response to Board-Endorsed Recommendations for the IEO Evaluation of the Role of the Fund as Trusted Advisor,SM/13/135, May30 (Washington). Available at: www.ieo-imf.org/ieo/pages/Multiheader.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013l, “Management Implementation Plan in Response to the IEO Evaluation of the Role of the Fund as Trusted Advisor: Key Actions for Departments,Memorandum from the First Deputy Managing Director to Heads of Departments, June28 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013m, “German-Central European Supply Chain,FO/DIS/13/100, July3 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013n, “2013 Report on Risk Management,SM/13/195, July9; BUFF/13/76, July31 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013o, “Nordic Regional Report—Staff Report for the 2013 Cluster Consultation,SM/13/230, August1; SUR/13/84, August30 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013p, “2014 Triennial Surveillance Review—Concept Note,FO/DIS/13/137, October4 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013q, “Statements Given on the Occasion of the International Monetary and Financial Committee (IMFC) MeetingOctober12 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013r, “Review of the Initial Experience with the Accountability Framework,Staff Memorandum to Deputy Managing Director, October28 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013s, “Compendium of Executive Board Work Procedures,EBD/13/66, October30 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013t, “Assessing Reserve Adequacy—Further Considerations,SM/13/301, November14; BUFF/13/110, December13 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013u, “Mandatory Financial Stability Assessments under the Financial Sector Assessment Program—Update,SM/13/304, November18; BUFF/13/115, December17 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013v, “Guidance Note on the Fund’s Transparency Policy,SM/13/322, November27 (Washington).

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013w, “SPR’s Checklist/Guidance Note for Country Assignment Handover,” (Washington). Available at: http://www-intranet.imf.org/departments/SPR/OGR/Pages/default.aspx.

      International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2014, “External Evaluation of the Independent Evaluation Office—Follow-Up,EBAP/14/10, February3 (Washington).

    Others:

      Crow, John, RicardoArriazu, and NielsThygesen,1999, “External Evaluation of IMF Surveillance: Report by a Group of Independent Experts” (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

      Horton, Mark, ManmohanKumar, and PaoloMauro,2009, “The State of Public Finances: A Cross-Country Fiscal Monitor,IMF Staff Position Note 09/21 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

      Lamdany, Ruben, and HaliEdison,2012, “Ten Years of Independent Evaluation at the IMF: What Does It Add Up To?in Independent Evaluation at the IMF: The First Decade, ed. byRubenLamdany and HaliEdison (ed) (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

      Manuel, Trevor, MichelCamdessus, KennethDam, MohamedEl-Erian, Sri MulyaniIndrawati, GuillermoOrtiz, RobertRubin, AmartyaSen, and XiaochuanZhou,2009, “Report of the Committee of Eminent Persons on IMF Governance Reform,March.

      Ocampo, José Antonio, StephenPickford, and CyrusRustomjee,2013, External Evaluation of the Independent Evaluation Office: Report of the Panel Convened by the IMF Executive Board, January.

      Reichmann, Thomas,2013, “Taking Stock of Previous IEO Evaluations,in Independent Evaluation Office, “The Role of the IMF as Trusted Advisor,” Background Study I. Available at: www.ieo-imf.org.

      Salop, Joanne,2012, “IEO Retrospective: Ten Years of Independent Evaluation at the IMF,in Independent Evaluation at the IMF: The First Decade, ed. byRubenLamdany and HaliEdison (ed) (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

      Stedman, Louellen,2012, “IEO Recommendations: A Review of Implementation,in Independent Evaluation at the IMF: The First Decade, ed. byRubenLamdany and HaliEdison (ed) (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

    Statement by the Managing Director: The Chairman’s Summing Up

    Statement by the Managing Director on the Independent Evaluation Office Report on Recurring Issues From a Decade of Evaluation: Lessons for the IMF

    Executive Board Meeting

    June 11, 2014

    I would like to thank the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) for preparing this helpful report, which provides an update of the progress made in addressing major recurring issues from past evaluations. I broadly agree with the findings of the report, including that the identified recurrent issues are to varying degrees inherent to the nature of the IMF and represent ongoing challenges. Addressing these issues is a continuing task to which management and staff remain fully committed.

    I welcome the IEO’s novel report, which identifies recurring issues from past evaluations and assesses progress in addressing them. The report’s focus on organizational silos, attention to risks and uncertainty, country and institutional context, evenhandedness, and Executive Board guidance and oversight is appropriate given their relevance and importance for the effectiveness and credibility of IMF operations.

    As the IEO rightly points out, some of the recurrent issues identified in the report are perennial, difficult to fully resolve, and intrinsically hard to measure. Notwithstanding these challenges, I am pleased that the evaluation found that considerable efforts have been made in addressing these issues and that progress is visible in several areas.

    Breaking down organizational silos and promoting interdepartmental coordination has been a major focus of IMF management. In addition to the initiatives listed in the report, I would like to point out the increased use of interdepartmental task forces, including for the production of spillover and pilot external sector reports, and the introduction of a structured review process for all policy papers that involves interdepartmental discussions at the concept note and (in many cases) the midpoint stage, in addition to the customary interdepartmental review of the final paper. These steps are promoting greater collaboration and cross-fertilization within the institution. The introduction of the accountability framework for department heads has afforded management another tool to foster greater collaboration across the IMF. Indeed, nearly half of all policy items in the work program of the Executive Board are now being authored jointly by two or more departments. The forthcoming Triennial Surveillance Review (TSR) will explore ways to further strengthen inderdepartmental coordination to support integrated surveillance.

    Efforts to ensure that IMF operations pay due attention to risks and uncertainty are continuing. As the report notes, assessments of risks and uncertainty in program design and surveillance are now routine and we are currently focused on ensuring the consistent application by staff of the tools that have been developed for this purpose. We have also strengthened operational support to member countries that are identified as high risk/priority countries in our periodic vulnerability exercises. As part of our ongoing efforts to enhance the risk culture within the institution, we recently established a dedicated risk management unit. Directors will soon have the opportunity to discuss management’s broader approach for the Fund’s overall risk management architecture, which will be elaborated upon in the context of the forthcoming Board discussion of the 2014 Risk Report of the Advisory Committee on Risk Management.

    Measuring progress in providing greater country and institutional context is a difficult task as the report acknowledges. Steps have been taken to ensure greater staff continuity, including by moving toward a three-year tenure for country assignments. This should facilitate the acquisition of more country-specific knowledge by economists and mission chiefs. Ongoing efforts to enhance diversity in the IMF, which are described in my last Global Policy Agenda, should also help broaden the perspectives of staff teams dealing with our member countries. More generally, tailoring policy advice to the specific circumstances of our member countries remains a key objective for the institution and will be a main theme in the forthcoming TSR.

    As the IEO notes, evenhandedness is a concept that is not easy to define and measure. Despite these practical challenges, the Fund takes concerns about lack of evenhandedness (real or perceived) very seriously. Ensuring evenhandedness is a continuous task that requires attention by management and staff. The forthcoming TSR will again analyze the nature and extent of any lack of evenhandedness in Fund surveillance, and we are committed to continue undertaking periodic reviews of this issue in program design. The Fund will also continue to strengthen its communication and outreach to the public to preempt misperceptions, especially in the context of Fund programs.

    Transparency and governance reforms can also help address perceptions about evenhandedness and the lack thereof. The most recent Review of the IMF’s Transparency Policy in 2013 further strengthened accountability by extending a stronger publication regime to all staff reports on the use of Fund resources and by setting incentives for faster publication. In addition, the monitoring of staff report modifications was enhanced to provide added comfort that the related policy is applied in an evenhanded manner. With regard to governance reforms, the IMF remains fully committed to support the completion of the 2010 governance reform agenda. These reforms should also help strengthen the guidance and oversight role of the Executive Board, which—as the IEO report notes—is ultimately linked to the governance of the institution.

    While the findings of the report are in many ways comforting, management and staff are committed to continue monitoring and addressing the recurring issues identified by the evaluation, taking into account tradeoffs that may arise from competing institutional mandates and resource constraints.

    On the specific issues raised by the IEO for Board consideration, I very much support repeating every five years a similar report identifying major recurrent issues from past evaluations and assessing progress in resolving them. Such a periodic stock-taking exercise will help orient management’s and staff’s efforts to address recurrent issues that have arisen from IEO evaluations.

    At the same time, I do not support the preparation of a separate status report by staff. Establishing progress toward addressing these complex, longstanding issues is best done through an evaluation of results, which the proposed five-yearly evaluation by the IEO is well placed to deliver. A status report only two years after the IEO evaluation would yield few new insights and would thus not justify the relatively high associated resource cost, particularly in the tight current budget environment. That said, the Board will continue to be informed through policy reviews and administrative papers about specific actions that are being taken to address the recurrent issues that have been identified in the IEO report.

    The Chairman’s Summing Up Independent Evaluation Office Report on Recurring Issues From a Decade Of Evaluation—Lessons for the IMF

    Executive Board Meeting 14/53

    June 11, 2014

    Executive Directors welcomed the report by the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) on “Recurring Issues from a Decade of Evaluation—Lessons for the IMF” and the Managing Director’s statement on the report. Directors were encouraged by the finding that actions have been taken to address major recurring issues from past IEO evaluations. They agreed that the issues identified in the report are likely to pose ongoing challenges as they are to varying degrees intrinsic to the culture, policies, and governance arrangements of the IMF. Directors emphasized, however, that to enhance the Fund’s effectiveness and credibility, efforts to address these issues should continue and looked forward to the 2014 Triennial Surveillance Review as an opportunity for further progress on this front.

    Directors acknowledged that in some instances the Board has fallen short of providing clear guidance and robust oversight. In this regard, they saw merit in increasing the Board’s involvement in laying out strategic priorities and monitoring their implementation. Directors recognized recent actions taken to improve the Board’s effectiveness, but saw room for further improving Board practices to sharpen the focus of the discussion. Greater candor in staff reports would also strengthen the ability of the Board to set strategic directions. The forthcoming Board retreat could be an appropriate setting to further reflect on these issues.

    Directors welcomed the significant steps taken by management to break down organizational silos and agreed that these have strengthened coordination across departments and synergies across work streams. They noted, however, that further efforts are needed to promote interdepartmental cooperation in support of integrated surveillance. In particular, they saw room for further improving the coherence of different multilateral surveillance products and the complementarities between multilateral and bilateral surveillance, enhancing the consistency of country reports.

    Directors welcomed the increased focus on risks and uncertainty in surveillance and program design. They called for further improvements in the analysis of risks, transmission channels, and policy responses, particularly in risk assessment matrices. Effective engagement with country authorities would be important in this regard.

    Directors agreed that staff could pay closer attention in its operations to country-specificity and institutional context, building on progress made in recent years. They underscored the benefits of enriching policy advice by considering alternative options and assessing their feasibility. Directors called for continued efforts to ensure continuity in country teams, particularly for small and fragile states, and greater staff diversity.

    Directors noted that the perception of a lack of even-handedness remains a concern across the membership, especially in emerging and smaller countries. They considered that this concern could be addressed through greater transparency and inclusiveness as well as progress on governance reform.

    On the specific issues raised by the IEO for Board consideration, Directors supported the recommendation to prepare a similar report on recurrent issues from IEO evaluations every five years. Most Directors also supported the recommendation that staff prepare a separate high-level report on the status of initiatives that address the recurring issues identified by the IEO. The first staff report could be prepared within two years, followed by similar reports every five years thereafter. A number of Directors saw limited merit in this proposal in view of its resource implications and the mechanisms already in place to keep the Board informed on progress.

    In line with established practices, management and staff will give careful consideration to the Board discussion in formulating the implementation plan, including approaches to monitor progress.

    From 2002 to 2013, the IEO’s 20 evaluations made 129 high-level recommendations, of which 111 (or 86 percent) received support from the Executive Board, either fully, partially, or in a nuanced way (Stedman, 2012, updated to include two additional evaluations). In addition, many of these evaluations included subsidiary recommendations or suggestions on how the high-level recommendations might be implemented in practice. Stedman (2012, updated) counts about 160 subsidiary recommendations and about 80 suggestions or examples; the Board supported about 40 percent of the subsidiary recommendations.

    For example, the third through fifth PMRs, produced between 2009 and 2012, all concluded that agreed actions had been implemented or were in train (with no outstanding performance benchmarks to be reviewed in the next PMR), and the Board agreed, even while noting that more needed to be done in some cases to address broader policy issues raised in IEO recommendations. In assessing the fourth PMR, the Board noted that the issue of staff mobility was still outstanding.

    Statement by the Managing Director on the External Evaluation of the Independent Evaluation Office, Executive Board Meeting, March 21, 2013.

    For example, Lamdany and Edison (2012) identify: (i) in order to strengthen its governance, the IMF needs to clarify the respective roles and responsibilities of the Board, Management, and senior staff; (ii) many IMF policies lack sufficient clarity to allow staff to implement them in an effective and consistent manner; (iii) greater evenhandedness is needed in the IMF’s application of policies and framing of advice across the membership; (iv) IMF staff has been reluctant to raise difficult issues with country authorities, particularly those of large advanced economies; (v) there is a significant degree of “group-think” and insularity among IMF staff, Management, and, to a lesser extent, even at the Board; (vi) the IMF needs to develop a monitoring and evaluation framework that links goals to policies and instruments, and specifies benchmarks that would allow it to measure outcomes and impacts and take corrective actions; (vii) in many instances, the IMF missed important developments because it did not adequately “connect the dots” from analysis that was done in different parts of the institution; and (viii) there is a large amount of “blueprinting” and one-size-fits-all approaches.

    The five groups are expanded to include closely related findings from the other groups. For instance, “Executive Board guidance and oversight” and “attention to risks and uncertainty” contain subsets of the findings related to “candor.” Likewise, “organizational silos” includes part of the findings related to “integration.” See Annex 1 for details.

    In addition, the Risk Working Group manages the Global Risk Assessment Matrix (G-RAM), Early Warning, and Vulnerability Exercises (see Section C for details).

    The G-RAM exercise is managed by the interdepartmental Risk Working Group, in which both area and functional departments participate.

    See, for example, the statement by Rimantas Sadzius, Chairman of the EU Council of Economic and Finance Ministers.

    For example, Oh-Seok Hyun, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Strategy and Finance for the Republic of Korea, stressed the importance of becoming “more attentive to various country-specific circumstances when framing policy advice, including with respect to the institutional arrangements for macro-prudential policy.” Likewise, Jim Flaherty, Minister of Finance for Canada, stated that traction with members required “better tailoring surveillance and advice to the needs of members through more country-level specificity.”

    The comparable figures for mission chiefs and authorities were some 30 percent and 16 percent, respectively. While the modification rate was higher for advanced countries, this may have reflected a higher rate of complaint by these countries, given that they had more resources at their disposal to scrutinize IMF documents before publication.

    To allay concerns about lack of evenhandedness in the application of transparency policy, the IMF has prepared an annual table on all modification requests, allowing Executive Directors to assess whether countries are being treated evenhandedly.

    See, for example, statements by Oh-Seok Hyun, Jim Flaherty, and Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf.

      You are not logged in and do not have access to this content. Please login or, to subscribe to IMF eLibrary, please click here

      Other Resources Citing This Publication