avatar International Monetary Fund Services
  • Location: District of Columbia 
  • Founded:
  • Website:

Pages

  • Page 1

    Annual Report 2015


  • Page 2

    Independent Evaluation Office E stablished in July 2001, the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) provides objective and independent evaluation on issues related to the IMF. The IEO operates independently of IMF management and at IEO Director Moises Schwartz at an IEO Teresa Ter-Minassian (former Director of the arm’s length from the IMF’s workshop. Fiscal Affairs Department) and Meg Lundsager (former U.S. Executive Director) participate in an Executive Board. Its goals IEO workshop in December 2014. are to enhance the learning culture within the IMF, strengthen the IMF’s external credibility, promote greater understanding of the work of the IMF throughout the membership, and support the Executive Board’s institutional governance and oversight Louellen Stedman (IEO Lead Evaluator), Alisa Mary O’Dea (former Alternate Executive Director responsibilities. For further Abrams (Senior IEO Research Officer), and Joe for Ireland) and Nicholas Veron (Senior Fellow at information on the IEO and its Eichenberger (Chief Evaluator, European Bank Bruegel) at an IEO workshop in December 2014. for Reconstruction and Development) at an IEO work program, please see its workshop in May 2015. website (www.ieo-imf.org) or contact the IEO at +1-202-623- 7312 or at ieo@imf.org. IEO staff. ©IMF photo


  • Page 3

    5


  • Page 4

    © 2015 International Monetary Fund Cover: IMF Multimedia Services ISBN: 978-1-51353-629-3 Publication orders may be placed online, by fax, or through the mail: International Monetary Fund, Publication Services P.O. Box 92780, Washington, D.C. 20090, U.S.A. Tel.: (202) 623-7430 Fax: (202) 623-7201 E-mail: publications@imf.org www.elibrary.imf.org


  • Page 5

    Contents Message from the Director v 1 Overview of Developments in FY2015 1 Budget and Staffing 1 Outreach and Communication 1 2 IEO Outputs in FY2015 2 Recurring Issues 2 IMF Response to the Financial and Economic Crisis 3 The IMF’s Role in Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) and the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) and The IMF and Aid to Sub-Saharan Africa 4 The IMF’s Approach to Capital Account Liberalization: Revisiting the 2005 IEO Evaluation 4 3 Follow-Up on IEO Evaluations 5 Management Implementation Plans 5 Periodic Monitoring Reports 5 4 Looking Ahead: Ongoing Evaluations and the IEO Work Program 6 Work in Progress 6 Future Work Program 6 Table 1 Completed and Ongoing IEO Work Program 7 Appendices 1 Administrative Budget: Independent Evaluation Office 8 2 Outreach Activities 9 iii


  • Page 6

    This page intentionally left blank


  • Page 7

    Message from the Director I am pleased to present the twelfth Annual Report of the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO), describing 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 evalu- ations: The IMF’s Approach to Capital Account Liberalization: Revisiting the 2005 IEO Evaluation; and Revisiting the IEO Evaluations of the IMF’s Role in PRSPs and the 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 evaluation of the IMF Response to the Financial and Economic Crisis covered the period from 2007 to 2013, excluding euro area programs, which are covered by a recently launched ongoing study. The evaluation, which was discussed by the Board in October 2014, concluded that the IMF played an important role within the global response to the crisis by responding promptly and proactively to reform its lending toolkit, ramp up lend- ing, and provide timely and influential advice on the need for a coordinated fiscal expan- sion. At the same time, the evaluation emphasized that more work was needed to better equip the IMF to anticipate and respond to future crises, in particular to detect and warn about systemic risks; to provide for sufficient resources to cover member needs under likely crisis scenarios; and to establish broad principles for engaging and cooperating with other organizations in a way that safeguards the IMF’s independence and helps ensure uniform treatment of all member countries. These areas for further work align with some of the persisting challenges for the IMF identified in the Recurring Issues evaluation. These issues are to some degree inherent to the IMF’s character as a multilateral institution with multiple objectives and a complex governance structure. Nonetheless, they are of vital importance to the IMF’s effectiveness and credibility. I am encouraged by the responses of the Managing Director and receptiv- ity of the Executive Board to the conclusions and recommendations of both evaluations discussed this year. The Sixth Periodic Monitoring Report on the Status of Implementation Plans in Response to Board-Endorsed IEO Recommendations, prepared for the first time by the IMF’s Office of Internal Audit, was issued in August 2014. Following a discussion by the Evaluation Committee, the Executive Board supported the conclusions of this report. The IEO was encouraged by the increased candor, objectivity, and depth of analysis in this report. We look forward to further strengthening of periodic monitoring reports in the future, including assessments of whether and how actions in response to IEO recom- mendations were implemented, and an analysis of whether they met their intended goals. The IEO is actively engaged in its FY2016 work program. The assessment of self- evaluation at the IMF is almost complete and will be discussed by the Executive Board in the first half of FY2016. In addition, we are working on evaluations of data and statistics at the IMF and the IMF and the euro area crisis, as well as revisiting the findings and conclusions of past evaluations. Moises J. Schwartz Director Independent Evaluation Office v


  • Page 8

    This page intentionally left blank


  • Page 9

    CHAPTER 1 Overview of Developments in FY2015 D uring FY2015, the IMF Executive Board dis- cussed the IEO evaluations Recurring Issues from a Decade of Evaluation: Lessons for the IMF Budget and Staffing In FY2015, the IEO expended approximately 92 percent and the IMF Response to the Financial and Eco- of its total budgetary resources, including the approved nomic Crisis. The IEO also issued two reports budget amount and the resources authorized to be carried updating three earlier evaluations. The first report forward from FY2014. These expenditures amounted to covered the 2005 IEO evaluation of The IMF’s 97 percent of its approved budget. Appendix 1 details the Approach to Capital Account Liberalization, and IEO budget and expenditures for FY2015. the second one updated two evaluations covering On March 12, 2015, the Executive Board approved low-income countries: The IMF’s Role in PRSPs the IEO FY2016 budget proposal of $5.8 million, rep- and the PRGF (2004) and The IMF and Aid to Sub- resenting zero real growth over FY2015. This budget, Saharan Africa (2007). In addition, the IEO has along with a carryover of unspent funds from FY2015 three ongoing evaluations: self-evaluation at the of up to 5 percent of the authorized FY2015 budget, IMF, data and statistics, and the IMF and the euro will allow the IEO to meet the demands of its FY2016 area crisis. work program. The FY2016 work program includes In June 2014, the Executive Board considered the three ongoing evaluations, the launch of two new evalu- Sixth Periodic Monitoring Report, which tracks the ations, and the preparation of two evaluation updates. implementation of actions in response to Board- The IEO also presented indicative budgets for FY2017 endorsed IEO recommendations from previous and FY2018, also based on zero real growth. evaluations. During this financial year, no Manage- ment Implementation Plan was issued for Board Outreach and Communication consideration. The remainder of this chapter reports on the IEO Outreach is critical to achieving the IEO’s objectives. budget and outreach efforts in the financial year. It is also an important tool for informing stakehold- Chapter 2 summarizes the evaluations on Recur- ers about IEO evaluations and thereby increasing their ring Issues and the IMF Response to the Financial impact. To publicize and encourage discussion of its and Economic Crisis, the Board discussions of these work, the IEO organized or participated in a number evaluations, and the two updates of past evaluations. of events in FY2015. These are listed in Appendix 2. Chapter 3 discusses follow-up on IEO evaluations. The IEO actively uses its website, along with email Chapter 4 addresses ongoing evaluations and the IEO communication with subscribers, to publicize its work work program going forward. Table 1 lists the IEO and to solicit public comments on ongoing, future, and evaluations and evaluation updates completed or in completed evaluations. The website (www.ieo-imf.org) progress. serves as a publicly accessible repository of all IEO work. 1


  • Page 10

    CHAPTER 2 IEO Outputs in FY2015 T his chapter discusses in further detail the evalua- tions of Recurring Issues at the IMF and the IMF Response to the Financial and Economic Crisis, as instances in which country-specific institutional arrangements, implementation capacity, and political constraints were insufficiently considered in program well as two updates of past evaluations. design. They also noted country authority complaints that the analytical framework used in IMF research was overly generic and “one-size-fits-all.” Recurring Issues Evenhandedness in the treatment of member countries. IEO evaluations cited differences The evaluation report on Recurring Issues from a across country groups, for example, in the analysis Decade of Evaluation: Lessons for the IMF was issued on underlying IMF policy advice on managing capital April 30, 2014 and discussed by the Executive Board on flows. They also found a reluctance to deliver can- June 11, 2014. The evaluation was prepared in response did messages about risks and vulnerabilities to the to a concern raised by the 2013 External Evaluation of larger or more advanced economies. the IEO that the broader lessons of IEO evaluations tend to be diluted by the follow-up process. The evaluation The evaluation found that the IMF had made consid- aimed to examine generic issues that had been repeat- erable efforts to improve its effectiveness in these areas. edly identified in IEO evaluations as affecting IMF per- For instance, a number of procedures had been put in formance. The evaluation identified five such issues: place to spell out risks and uncertainties in the IMF’s analytical work, and steps had been taken to strengthen Executive Board guidance and oversight. Some the coordination mechanisms for integrating work IEO evaluations pointed to a lack of clear Board across departments. However, challenges remained. guidance in areas such as the longer-term role of the The evaluation concluded that these issues had arisen IMF in low-income countries and the appropriate in multiple contexts because they were rooted in the scope and design of structural conditionality. This IMF’s culture, policies, and governance arrangements. led, at times, to inconsistencies in advice to member To varying degrees, these issues emanated from the countries and in application of IMF policies. IMF’s character as a multilateral institution with mul- Organizational silos. Several IEO evaluations con- tiple objectives and a complex governance structure. cluded that silo behavior contributed to insuffi- Hence, the evaluation report emphasized that efforts cient integration of global perspectives in bilateral to address these issues needed to go beyond the spe- surveillance and financial sector issues in macro cific contexts in which they had been raised. Further, it surveillance; evaluations also highlighted that underscored that areas inherent to the Fund’s complex there were discrepancies in the advice provided in governance, in particular evenhandedness and Execu- reports prepared by different departments. tive Board guidance and oversight, would likely pose Insufficient attention to risks in surveillance ongoing challenges for the institution. and program design. A number of IEO evalua- The Managing Director broadly agreed with the findings tions found inadequate discussion of risks in staff of the report and indicated Management’s commitment to reports, in particular in program requests. Often, addressing the shortcomings identified. In particular, the this complicated how the IMF responded when Managing Director emphasized that “the Fund takes con- events deviated from central scenarios. cerns about lack of evenhandedness (real or perceived) Country and institutional context in analytical work in surveillance or program design very seriously,” and and policy advice. Past IEO evaluations identified pledged to undertake periodic reviews of this issue. 2


  • Page 11

    CHAPTER 2 • IEO OUTPUTS IN FY2015 The Executive Board discussed the evaluation on the IMF to strive to remain a focal point for debate on June 11, 2014. Directors welcomed the report and macroeconomic and financial risks, and to continue to broadly supported the IEO’s recommendation to estab- encourage an environment that remains genuinely open lish a framework for regularly monitoring recurring to alternative perspectives. issues, periodically reviewing progress to strengthen The large increase in financial support to member the Board’s oversight, and providing learning opportu- countries in response to the crisis was made possible nities for staff. by a resource mobilization effort that quadrupled the The evaluation report, along with a statement by the IMF’s resources to about $1 trillion by 2013. However, Managing Director and the Chair’s Summing Up of the the doubling of quotas agreed in 2010 had not become Executive Board Discussion, are available on the IEO effective at the time the evaluation was concluded— website. and remained so at the end of FY2015—leaving the IMF dependent on borrowing arrangements for more than two-thirds of its total credit capacity. Implement- IMF Response to the Financial and ing the agreed quota increase and realignment of shares Economic Crisis is vital to the governance and legitimacy of the institu- tion. It is also important to providing greater certainty The IEO released an evaluation of the IMF Response that resources will be available when needed. to the Financial and Economic Crisis on November 4, In responding to the crisis, the IMF collaborated with 2014. The evaluation examined the IMF response to the other organizations including the G20 (particularly on financial and economic crisis that followed the Lehman the Mutual Assessment Process) and the Financial Sta- collapse in September 2008, excluding the euro area bility Board. These collaborations were largely effective programs. in addressing aspects of the crisis and also enhanced The evaluation found that, despite being in a weak the traction of IMF advice. However, to safeguard its position when it erupted, the IMF was prompt in independence and help ensure uniform treatment of all responding to the crisis and helping member countries member countries, the evaluation recommended that cope with it. The IMF quadrupled its resource enve- the IMF define broadly applicable principles of engage- lope, reformed its lending toolkit, and ramped up lend- ment and cooperation with other organizations, while ing from almost nil to about $400 billion in 2008–13. remaining pragmatic and generally flexible, and allow- The IMF also provided timely and influential advice on ing for adaptation to specific circumstances. the need for a coordinated fiscal expansion, although its The evaluation report was discussed by the Execu- subsequent advice in 2010–11 to initiate fiscal consoli- tive Board on October 28, 2014. During this discus- dation in some of the largest economies was premature. sion, Executive Directors welcomed the evaluation and The evaluation concluded that the IMF played an considered that the IEO report provided a generally important role within the global response to the crisis. balanced assessment of the IMF’s response. Directors However, it also determined that more work was needed broadly agreed with most of the recommendations. to equip the IMF to better anticipate and respond to In particular, they endorsed the recommendation that future crises. the IMF maintain sufficient resources to contribute The IMF considerably expanded its exercises, tools, to future crisis resolution, relying primarily on mem- and analytical work to be more alert and effective in ber quotas to reduce uncertainty and strengthen its warning about potential risks and vulnerabilities. How- legitimacy. They also generally supported the rec- ever, concerns persisted at the time of the evaluation ommendation to develop guidelines for engagement about the proliferation of exercises and tools, whether that establish broadly applicable principles and clarify these exercises had been effective in providing early the IMF’s roles and accountabilities, while remaining and clear warning about impending risks, and whether flexible and pragmatic to allow adaptation to spe- IMF surveillance was well placed to detect emerging cific circumstances. Finally, they broadly supported vulnerabilities in systemic financial centers. The evalu- the IEO recommendation to consolidate and simplify ation recommended that the IMF prioritize and consoli- initiatives to identify and assess risks and vulner- date these efforts to ensure that key messages reached abilities. policymakers in a timely manner and that financial The evaluation report, along with a statement by the surveillance was organized in a way that emphasized Managing Director and the Chair’s Summing Up of the systemic risk, focusing in particular on truly systemic Executive Board Discussion, is available on the IEO financial centers. Moreover, the evaluation called for website. 3


  • Page 12

    CHAPTER 2 • IEO OUTPUTS IN FY2015 The IMF’s Role in Poverty Reduction The IMF’s Approach to Capital Strategy Papers (PRSPs) and the Account Liberalization: Revisiting the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility 2005 IEO Evaluation (PRGF) and The IMF and Aid to In March 2015, the IEO issued an update of the find- Sub-Saharan Africa ings and conclusions of the 2005 evaluation of The IMF’s Approach to Capital Account Liberalization. In August 2014, the IEO issued a report on Revisiting This update found that the IMF had made consid- the IEO Evaluations of The IMF’s Role in PRSPs and erable progress since 2005 in clarifying its approach the PRGF (2004) and The IMF and Aid to Sub-Saharan to the liberalization and management of cross-border Africa (2007) that updated past findings on IMF pro- capital flows. IMF staff produced and synthesized cesses and programs in low-income countries. a substantial amount of academic and operational The report found that the IMF had made signifi- research on capital account liberalization and capital cant progress on most of the challenges identified controls and developed new multilateral surveillance by the two evaluations. Highlights included clarifi- products (e.g., spillover reports) that allow for greater cations of relevant operational policies on a broad attention to push factors affecting international capi- front; program measures to protect social and other tal flows. In 2012, the IMF issued the Integrated Sur- priority spending; and improved external communi- veillance Decision that elucidated the place of capital cations, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa. The IMF account issues in bilateral and multilateral surveil- maintained momentum in these areas as it launched lance. Also in 2012, the IMF arrived at an institutional a new facilities framework for low-income coun- view on which to base Fund advice on the liberaliza- tries, including replacement of the PRGF with the tion and management of capital flows. Extended Credit Facility in 2009. The report noted, The institutional view recognized that full capital however, that more analysis was needed on the quality account liberalization may not be an appropriate goal of social and other priority expenditures to strengthen for all countries at all times and that under certain cir- the analytical framework of IMF support to low- cumstances capital flow management measures could income countries. have a place in the macroeconomic policy toolkit. Going forward, the report underscored the impor- This view helped to shift the public image of the tance of facilitating effective collaboration with the Fund as a doctrinaire proponent of free capital mobil- World Bank in the wake of the Bank’s 2014 deci- ity. However, the update concluded that the consen- sion to eliminate the requirement for PRSPs, which sus around this institutional view remained fragile, had been the main organizing process for Bank-Fund given the differing perspectives on how to manage cooperation in low-income countries over the prior capital flows within the IMF, as well as in the aca- decade. Lessons from experience have indicated demic and policymaking communities. The IEO con- that collaboration works best where there are clear cluded that continued efforts were needed to ensure and complementary institutional mandates, defined consistent advice across the membership on capital links to core Fund and Bank activities, and a shared flow management issues and to support multilateral understanding of respective staff roles and respon- cooperation on policies affecting international capital sibilities. This update report served as an input for flows, against a backdrop of a patchwork of bilat- the subsequent Executive Board discussions on a new eral, regional, and international agreements regulat- approach to documenting poverty reduction strategies ing cross-border capital flows among different groups that anchor IMF-supported programs in low-income of countries. countries. The update and a statement issued by the Managing The update and a statement issued by the Managing Director are available on the IEO website. Director are available on the IEO website. 4


  • Page 13

    CHAPTER 3 Follow-Up on IEO Evaluations F ollowing the 2006 External Evaluation of the IEO, the IMF adopted a framework for follow-up on IEO evaluations. The main components of the fol- Periodic Monitoring Reports The Executive Board supported the conclusions of low up process are the Management Implementation the Sixth Periodic Monitoring Report (PMR) on the Plans (MIPs) and the Periodic Monitoring Reports status of implementation plans in response to Board- (PMRs). Soon after the Executive Board discussion endorsed IEO recommendations in August 2014. The of an IEO evaluation report, IMF Management is decision followed consideration of the PMR by the expected to present to the Board for its approval a Board’s Evaluation Committee. forward-looking MIP laying out the actions intended This was the first PMR prepared by the Office of Internal in response to evaluation recommendations endorsed Audit and Inspection under the procedure recommended by the Board. The implementation status and any by the external evaluators of the IEO and approved by the necessary remedial or substitute actions are then to be Board in February 2013. It reviewed the status of MIPs summarized in an annual Periodic Monitoring Report for four IEO evaluations issued during 2011–13: IMF Per- for Board consideration. From 2007–12, PMRs were formance in the Run-Up to the Financial and Economic prepared by the Strategy, Policy, and Review Depart- Crisis; Research at the IMF; International Reserves; and ment. As recommended by the 2013 External Evalua- The Role of the IMF as Trusted Advisor. The PMR also tion of the IEO, in 2014 the IMF shifted responsibility provided an update on progress on relevant issues related for preparation of PMRs to the Office of Internal to previous MIPs agreed since 2007. Audit and Inspection. The IEO historically has played The PMR concluded that a range of the actions an informal role by advising the Executive Board dur- envisaged in the MIPs for the four subject evaluations ing the follow-up process. had either been implemented or were in progress; a few actions had been partially implemented, with no further action foreseen. The PMR noted that further steps on Management Implementation Plans many of the actions that were in progress would be tracked in the next PMR; because work in these areas No Management Implementation Plans (MIPs) were appeared to be largely on track, this additional follow- issued during FY2015. MIPs for three evaluations were up would be provided at a more general level. pending at end-FY2015: IMF Forecasts: Process, Qual- In considering the PMR, the Executive Board’s Eval- ity, and Country Perspectives (discussed by the Execu- uation Committee noted that it represented an improve- tive Board in February 2014); Recurring Issues from a ment over previous reports but that more could be done Decade of Evaluation: Lessons for the IMF (discussed to sharpen the focus on whether implementation mea- in June 2014); and the IMF Response to the Financial sures proposed by Management had been effective in and Economic Crisis (discussed in October 2014). Sub- achieving the high-level objectives of Board-endorsed sequently, in early FY2016 Management issued MIPs recommendations. for the Forecasts and Recurring Issues evaluations. The PMR is available on the IEO website. 5


  • Page 14

    CHAPTER 4 Looking Ahead: Ongoing Evaluations and the IEO Work Program Work in Progress Future Work Program In early calendar year 2015, the IEO launched a new On January 26, 2015, the IEO posted on its web- evaluation on the IMF and the euro area crisis. This site a note on “Possible Topics for Evaluation over the evaluation will assess the IMF’s engagement in the Medium Term.” The IEO consulted with Executive euro area, including its programs in Greece, Ireland, Directors and other stakeholders on potential future and Portugal. evaluation topics based on this note. There was particu- The IEO is in the final stages of work on “Self- lar interest on evaluations focusing on macro-financial Evaluation at the IMF: An IEO Assessment.” Work issues and their integration in IMF surveillance and is continuing on an evaluation of data and statistics at program work, and on IMF engagement in fragile the IMF. countries. The IEO will be launching new evaluations as the ongoing ones are completed. In addition, the IEO will continue its series of reports that revisit past IEO evaluations five to ten years after they were first issued. 6


  • Page 15

    CHAPTER 4 • LOOKING AHEAD: ONGOING EVALUATIONS AND THE IEO WORK PROGRAM Table 1. Completed and Ongoing IEO Work Program Project Status* Evaluations Evaluation of Prolonged Use of IMF Resources Completed (August 2002) The IMF and Recent Capital Account Crises Completed (May 2003) Fiscal Adjustment in IMF-Supported Programs Completed (July 2003) Evaluation of the IMF’s Role in PRSPs and the PRGF Completed (June 2004) The IMF and Argentina, 1999–2001 Completed (July 2004) IMF Technical Assistance Completed (January 2005) The IMF’s Approach to Capital Account Liberalization Completed (April 2005) IMF Support to Jordan, 1989–2004 Completed (October 2005) Financial Sector Assessment Program Completed (November 2005) Multilateral Surveillance Completed (March 2006) The IMF and Aid to Sub-Saharan Africa Completed (January 2007) IMF Exchange Rate Policy Advice Completed (March 2007) Structural Conditionality in IMF-Supported Programs Completed (October 2007) Governance of the IMF: An Evaluation Completed (April 2008) IMF Involvement in International Trade Policy Issues Completed (May 2009) IMF Interactions with Member Countries Completed (November 2009) IMF Performance in the Run-Up to the Financial and Economic Completed (December 2010) Crisis: IMF Surveillance in 2004–07 Research at the IMF: Relevance and Utilization Completed (May 2011) International Reserves: IMF Concerns and Country Perspectives Completed (August 2012) The Role of the IMF as Trusted Advisor Completed (December 2012) IMF Forecasts: Process, Quality, and Country Perspectives Completed (January 2014) Recurring Issues from a Decade of Evaluation: Lessons for the IMF Completed (April 2014) IMF Response to the Financial and Economic Crisis: An IEO Assessment Completed (October 2014) Self-Evaluation at the IMF: An IEO Assessment In progress Data and Statistics at the IMF In progress The IMF and the Euro Area Crisis In progress Evaluation Updates Prolonged Use of IMF Resources: Revisiting the 2002 IEO Evaluation Completed (July 2013) Fiscal Adjustment in IMF-Supported Programs: Revisiting the 2003 IEO Evaluation Completed (July 2013) IMF Technical Assistance: Revisiting the 2005 IEO Evaluation Completed (February 2014) Revisiting the IEO Evaluations of the IMF’s Role in PRSPs and the PRGF (2004) and Completed (August 2014) The IMF and Aid to Sub-Saharan Africa (2007) The IMF’s Approach to Capital Account Liberalization: Revisiting the 2005 IEO Evaluation Completed (March 2015) *Date indicates when the evaluation report was transmitted to the IMF Executive Board. 7


  • Page 16

    Appendix 1 Administrative Budget: Independent Evaluation Office (In U.S. dollars) FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 Budget Outturn Budget Outturn Budget Total resources including carry-forward 6,178,787 5,886,432 6,003,304 5,535,544 6,178,056 1 Of which carry-forward 554,245 … 281,227 … 286,104 Administrative resources 5,624,542 … 5,722,077 … 5,891,952 Regular staff allocation 4,313,440 4,360,738 4,458,700 4,357,234 4,611,590 Discretionary budget 1,311,102 1,525,694 1,263,377 1,178,310 1,280,362 Of which: Contractual services (including overtime) 611,302 1,084,899 624,140 888,518 639,119 Business travel and seminar program 412,928 377,542 414,658 232,922 415,317 Publications 16,597 13,520 16,862 21,087 16,964 Other administrative items 270,275 49,733 207,717 35,783 208,962 1 Resources carried forward from the previous year under established rules, aside from FY2014 when a higher carry-forward was approved on a one-time, exceptional basis. 8


  • Page 17

    Appendix 2 Outreach Activities June 2014, Hong Kong SAR February 2015, Brussels, Belgium Presentation of the findings of the IEO evaluation of IEO Director led a joint workshop with Bruegel as part IMF Forecasts: Process, Quality, and Country Per- of the ongoing IEO evaluation of “The IMF and the spectives at the Hong Kong Monetary Authority. Euro Area Crisis.” December 2014, Luxembourg City, Luxembourg March 2015, Buenos Aires, Argentina Presentations of findings of the IEO evaluation of IMF Presentation of the IEO evaluation of IMF Response to Response to the Financial and Economic Crisis at the the Financial and Economic Crisis to senior govern- European Investment Bank and the European Court of ment and Central Bank officials. Auditors. March 2015, Santiago, Chile December 2014, Frankfurt, Germany Presentation of the conclusions of the IEO evaluation Presentations of findings of the IEO evaluation of IMF of IMF Response to the Financial and Economic Crisis Response to the Financial and Economic Crisis at the at the Fiscal Seminar of the United Nations Economic European Central Bank and the Bundesbank. Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. February 2015, Waterloo, Canada Presentation of lessons of the IEO evaluation of IMF Response to the Financial and Economic Crisis at the Centre for International Governance Innovation. 9


  • Page 18


  • Page 19


  • Page 20

    IEO Annual Report 2015


  • Page 21

  • View More

Get the full picture and Receive alerts on lawsuits, news articles, publications and more!