Browse

You are looking at 1 - 7 of 7 items for :

  • Independent Evaluation Office Reports x
  • Public Administration; Public Sector Accounting and Audits x
Clear All
International Monetary Fund. Independent Evaluation Office

Abstract

This report examines whether the IMF has effectively leveraged an important asset: data. It finds that in general, the IMF has been able to rely on a large amount of data of acceptable quality, and that data provision from member countries has improved markedly over time. Nonetheless, problems with data or data practices have, at times, adversely affected the IMF’s surveillance and lending activities. The roots of data problems are diverse, ranging from problems due to member countries’ capacity constraints or reluctance to share sensitive data to internal issues such as lack of appropriate staff incentives, institutional rigidities, and long-standing work practices. Efforts to tackle these problems are piecemeal, the report finds, without a clear comprehensive strategy that recognizes data as an institutional strategic asset, not just a consumption good for economists. The report makes a number of recommendations that could promote greater progress in this regard.

International Monetary Fund. Independent Evaluation Office

Abstract

The twelfth Annual Report of the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) describes activities during financial year 2015 (May 1, 2014–April 30, 2015). During the financial year, the IEO completed an evaluation of the IMF response to the global financial and economic crisis. It also issued two reports updating three past evaluations: The IMF’s Approach to Capital Account Liberalization: Revisiting the 2005 IEO Evaluation; and Revisiting the IEO Evaluations of the IMF’s Role in Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP) and the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) (2004) and the IEO Evaluation of IMF and Aid to Sub-Saharan Africa (2007). In addition, the Executive Board discussed the IEO evaluation of Recurring Issues from a Decade of Evaluation: Lessons for the IMF, which was issued to the Board in FY2014. The paper reports on the IEO budget and outreach efforts in the financial year. This paper also summarizes the evaluations on Recurring Issues and the IMF Response to the Financial and Economic Crisis, the Board discussions of these evaluations, and the two updates of past evaluations. It also discusses follow-up on IEO evaluations and addresses ongoing evaluations and the IEO work program going forward. A table lists the IEO evaluations and evaluation updates completed or in progress.

Ruben Lamdany and Leonardo Martinez-Diaz

Abstract

The papers in this volume draw on background work done in preparation for the study Governance of the IMF: An Evaluation, Independent Evaluation Office, International Monetary Fund, May 28, 2008 (available at http://www.ieo-imf.org). This compilation presents in one collection the most recent work to date on the subject of governance of the IMF and contributes to the ongoing dialogue on how best to strengthen the governance of this important global institution. Good governance can contribute to the IMF’s legitimacy by ensuring appropriate voice and representation for the membership, by allowing the Fund to fulfill its mandates effectively and efficiently, and by facilitating accountability for relevant stakeholders. Three main conclusions follow from the studies in this volume. First, to strengthen its legitimacy and effectiveness, the Fund needs greater, higher level and more transparent involvement of member country authorities in its governance. Second, the Board needs to play a stronger role in strategy development and oversight, which requires a shift away from the day-to-day business of the organization. Finally, there are significant accountability gaps that need to be addressed if the IMF is to remain effective and regain legitimacy.

International Monetary Fund. Independent Evaluation Office

Abstract

During FY2015, the IMF Executive Board discussed the IEO evaluations Recurring Issues from a Decade of Evaluation: Lessons for the IMF and the IMF Response to the Financial and Economic Crisis. The IEO also issued two reports updating three earlier evaluations. The first report covered the 2005 IEO evaluation of The IMF’s Approach to Capital Account Liberalization, and the second one updated two evaluations covering low-income countries: The IMF’s Role in PRSPs and the PRGF (2004) and The IMF and Aid to Sub-Saharan Africa (2007). In addition, the IEO has three ongoing evaluations: self-evaluation at the IMF, data and statistics, and the IMF and the euro area crisis.

International Monetary Fund. Independent Evaluation Office

Abstract

This chapter discusses in further detail the evaluations of Recurring Issues at the IMF and the IMF Response to the Financial and Economic Crisis, as well as two updates of past evaluations.

International Monetary Fund. Independent Evaluation Office

Abstract

Following the 2006 External Evaluation of the IEO, the IMF adopted a framework for follow-up on IEO evaluations. The main components of the follow up process are the Management Implementation Plans (MIPs) and the Periodic Monitoring Reports (PMRs). Soon after the Executive Board discussion of an IEO evaluation report, IMF Management is expected to present to the Board for its approval a forward-looking MIP laying out the actions intended in response to evaluation recommendations endorsed by the Board. The implementation status and any necessary remedial or substitute actions are then to be summarized in an annual Periodic Monitoring Report for Board consideration. From 2007–12, PMRs were prepared by the Strategy, Policy, and Review Department. As recommended by the 2013 External Evaluation of the IEO, in 2014 the IMF shifted responsibility for preparation of PMRs to the Office of Internal Audit and Inspection. The IEO historically has played an informal role by advising the Executive Board during the follow-up process.

International Monetary Fund. Independent Evaluation Office

Abstract

In early calendar year 2015, the IEO launched a new evaluation on the IMF and the euro area crisis. This evaluation will assess the IMF’s engagement in the euro area, including its programs in Greece, Ireland, and Portugal.