Abstract
1. The management and staff responses to the Report of the External Evaluation of the Independent Evaluation Office make a number of suggestions for the modalities of operation of IEO that have potentially important implications for the independence of the office. These, in IEO’s view, would warrant careful consideration. This supplement is being circulated to provide IEO’s views on the particular issue of publication policy.
1. The management and staff responses to the Report of the External Evaluation of the Independent Evaluation Office make a number of suggestions for the modalities of operation of IEO that have potentially important implications for the independence of the office. These, in IEO’s view, would warrant careful consideration. This supplement is being circulated to provide IEO’s views on the particular issue of publication policy.
2. The staff response states that a publications policy for IEO reports needs to be established. In fact, such a policy already exists. The Terms of Reference of the Director of the Independent Evaluation Office provide that “The Director will adopt, in consultation with the Executive Board, standard rules for the publication of evaluation reports and other documents produced by the IEO.” Following consultations with the Board, the then Director approved procedures which were implemented on August 8, 2002. These procedures have been followed since that time. The IEO is not aware of any requests for factual corrections or deletions to IEO reports that have not been considered carefully, and incorporated where warranted.
3. Recently, IEO has commenced an internal review of the current procedures. It is our view that they should be updated to reflect evolving best practice with respect to factual corrections and deletions. It is our intention to consult with the Executive Board on such an update. However, the proposal in the Managing Director’s statement to modify the IEO’s Terms of Reference to allow the Executive Board “to correct factual inaccuracies” would, in IEO’s view, not be best practice and would be inconsistent with the independence of the office and its reports.