## Categorization of Open Actions in Management Implementation Plans (ppea2020014)

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [Categorization of Open Actions in Management Implementation Plans (ppea2020014)](https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/pp/2020/english/ppea2020014.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/files/publications/pp/2020/english/ppea2020014.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/files/publications/pp/2020/english/ppea2020014.pdf.json)

---

### Executive summary and scope
- The paper applies the Board-endorsed Framework (March 2019) to triage the backlog of open actions in Management Implementation Plans (MIPs) responding to IEO recommendations.
- Tenth PMR reviewed 62 MIP actions and assessed 24 as off-track; Ninth PMR had assessed 32 actions as off-track.
- Out of 62 actions, OIA assessed 38 actions to be on track; of those 38 on-track actions, 16 were completed in the past year and closed in the Tenth PMR.
- Reformulated actions (Categories 2 and 3) would be reissued as new MIPs by July 2020 and then subject to regular PMR monitoring.
- Proposed immediate outcomes include retirements from PMR monitoring for actions in Categories 4 and 5 and reformulation for selected Category 2–3 actions.

### Key statistics and triage allocation
- Total MIP actions reviewed: 62
- Actions assessed as off-track (Tenth PMR): 24
- Actions assessed as off-track (Ninth PMR): 32
- OIA on-track assessment: 38 actions
- On-track actions completed and closed in Tenth PMR: 16 actions
- Proposed triage numeric breakdown:
  - Category 2: 2 actions (to be reformulated)
  - Category 3: 6 actions (to be reformulated)
  - Category 4: 6 actions (proposed to be retired from PMR)
  - Category 5: 10 actions (proposed to be retired from PMR)

### Categorization framework and immediate effects
- Category definitions (as applied):
  - Category 1: on-track actions remain subject to regular PMR monitoring.
  - Category 2: outcomes not achieved while guidelines are in place — reformulate within six months of approval.
  - Category 3: actions not SMART — reformulate within six months of approval.
  - Category 4: long-term technical or culture change — can be retired after five years of PMR monitoring.
  - Category 5: superseded, lack of value, or duplication — retire immediately from PMR.
- Immediate observed effect:
  - Eight actions previously assessed as off-track by the Ninth PMR were brought back on track in the past year.
- Rationale for retirements:
  - Sixteen actions proposed for Categories 4 and 5 generally remain highly relevant, have seen substantial progress, are addressed through principal workstreams with Board oversight, and retaining them in PMR would be duplicative.

### Proposed reformulation and follow-up (Categories 2–3)
- Reformulation objectives:
  - Ensure original IEO recommendation is effectively tackled.
  - Embed compliance incentives and/or accountability mechanisms.
  - Consider trade-offs and implementation constraints to develop comprehensive, realistic, and substantive commitments.
  - Align new MIPs with SMART (Specific, Monitorable, Attainable, Relevant and Time-bound) principles.
- Timing and governance:
  - Reformulated actions in Categories 2 and 3 to be reissued as new MIPs by July 2020.
  - MIP(s) to be presented to the Board’s Evaluation Committee no later than six months from approval of the proposed categorization.

### Category 3 exemplars (data management and related actions, 3.1–3.6)
- 3.1 Common Surveillance Database (CSD)
  - Finding: Action as written not meaningfully monitorable; CSD improvements increased demand but unclear if improved data management objective achieved.
  - Revised action: Ensure CSD use is properly monitored, with periodic usage reports to the Data Governance Group (DGG).
  - Note: CSD is integrated with ADs’ workflow and used for REOs, WEO, and the Vulnerability Exercise.
- 3.2 Catalogue of Time Series (CTS)
  - Finding: Lack of specificity; updates in progress (real, external, financial sector catalogues completed; fiscal sector catalogue expected by end-FY2020).
  - Revised action: Leverage CTS cleanup review (CTS 3.0 started May 2017; review expected completed by end-2023 with CTS 4.0) and use milestones to ensure strong data management.
- 3.3 Metadata Cleanup (first instance)
  - Finding: Action lacks completion definition; first cleanup completed in 2018 focusing on economic variables in staff reports; comprehensive cleanup spans over 200 databases.
  - Revised action: Embed metadata cleanup in DGG’s “absolute priority list” aligned with DGG milestones.
- 3.4 Adopt Fund-wide data management standards
  - Finding: Broad and long-term; progress on unified AD guidelines and metadata work noted.
  - Revised action: Break the process into substantive, front-loaded milestones.
- 3.5 Confidential information handling
  - Finding: Guidance issued in 2013 but no mechanism to assess staff’s treatment of confidential information; informal/brainstorming discussions hard to monitor.
  - Revised proposals:
    - Ensure staff keep authorities informed about Fund policies on confidential information, possibly via written communications shareable with authorities.
    - Extend annual OED Survey to monitor members’ satisfaction with handling of confidential information and whether informal discussions took place and were useful.
- 3.6 Working papers quality control
  - Finding: Existing 2012 guidelines require originating departments to certify quality; measuring quality beyond guidelines is costly and not feasible within PMR scope.
  - Revised action: Propose measurable deliverable balancing working papers’ nature and resource constraints; enhance dissemination of guidelines and post departmental approval procedures to strengthen approver accountability.

### Category 4: long-term technical or culture change (4.1–4.6) — retirement rationale
- Framework rule: PMRs monitor progress for five reporting cycles following MIP approval; staff proposes retiring actions that have met the five-year requirement and are now addressed through dedicated workstreams with Board oversight.
- Specific actions and proposals:
  - 4.1 Early consultations: expected of all teams — proposed retirement from PMR monitoring given continuous nature and entrenchment.
  - 4.2 Sharing major policy questions and assumptions at least one week ahead of Article IV missions — proposed retirement from PMR monitoring.
    - Evidence: Revised 2019 OED Survey shows early exchanges and one-week sharing are common; Survey reported overall satisfaction above 90 percent; response rate 80 with 152 countries providing feedback (2018 response rate 75 percent, based on 71 responses representing 141 countries).
  - 4.3 Regional and Gender Diversity
    - Findings: Continuous action lacking benchmarks; progress documented:
      - Share of female B-level staff increased by almost 50 percent since 2012.
      - Share of URR nationals rose to 26 percent over the past five years.
      - Share of women economists at B-level reached 27 percent (benchmark 25 percent).
      - Share of all female B-level staff at 30 percent is at the benchmark.
    - Proposal: Retire action 4.3 from PMR monitoring? The Revised Proposed Decision instead proposes retaining action 4.3 under PMR monitoring for an additional period of five PMR reporting cycles to allow more time to strengthen diversity.
    - Oversight and initiatives: 2025 Diversity Benchmarks Working Group to recommend benchmarks to be achieved by end FY 2025; departments to develop action plans starting in FY20; twice-yearly discussions between Heads of Departments and management; Diversity and Inclusion Report and HRD reporting; OEDs to receive quarterly data and Workday rollout to provide a diversity dashboard.
  - 4.4–4.5 Professional diversity / financial sector expertise
    - Findings: Continuous actions; marked progress:
      - Mid-career hires averaged 78 percent in the past five years.
      - Nearly 40 percent of these hires were by MCM.
      - About a quarter of all new hires had macro-financial expertise.
      - Financial sector experts tripled in the last decade.
    - Proposal: Retire actions 4.4–4.5 from PMR monitoring as superseded by broader MIP actions and HR workforce planning.
  - 4.6 Linkages, spillovers, cross-country experience
    - Findings: Broad, qualitative, not time-bound; substantive achievements since 2011 on spillovers and linkages.
    - Proposal: Retire action 4.6 from PMR monitoring; follow-up through Surveillance Reviews and the 2020 CSR focusing on spillovers and linkages, and revised surveillance guidance note.

### Category 5: superseded, lack of value, and duplication (5.1–5.10) — examples and rationale
- Overall staff rationale:
  - Ten actions (5.1–5.10) proposed for Category 5 retirement from PMR monitoring due to supersession by comprehensive workstreams, newer MIPs, or lack of cost-effectiveness.
- Examples summarized:
  - 5.1 (Greece, Ireland, Portugal 2017): Analytical underpinnings of surveillance and program design — retire since addressed through CSR, MAC DSA reviews, IPF work, RoC guidance.
  - 5.2 (Behind the Scenes with Data 2017): CD in Fragile States — retire as superseded by MIPs on Fragile States and multi-partner vehicles (D4D, FSSF); 27 low-income/fragile countries subscribing to e-GDDS have begun publishing macroeconomic data via National Summary Data Page.
  - 5.3 (Embed macro-financial analysis in Article IV, 2015): retire given overlap with CSR and FSAP Reviews and actions in 2019 MIP on IMF Financial Surveillance.
  - 5.4 Forecast errors: retire as superseded; toolkits revamped and realism tools integrated into LIC DSF and MAC DSA.
  - 5.5 Pilot for medium-term forecasts: superseded by RES pilot processes with top-down guidance.
  - 5.6 Multi-country macro-econometric forecasting model: retire due to technical infeasibility and resource priorities.
  - 5.7 Cross-country examples: retire as superseded; KMU central repository and CSR focus will address leveraging cross-country experience.
  - 5.8 Traction: retire as superseded by 2020 CSR and evolving measurement concepts of traction.
  - 5.9 Cross-country lessons from FSAPs and 5.10 Training, tools, thematic studies: retire as superseded by recent IEO evaluation on IMF Financial Surveillance and associated MIP actions.
- Forecasts and tool developments cited:
  - D4D launched mid-2018 with a workplan supporting urgent member needs (example: debt data).
  - Ongoing updates to MAC DSA and realism tools to improve forecast quality discussions.

### Implementation guidance, governance, and next steps
- Implementation guidance:
  - Reformulate Category 2–3 actions to be SMART, embed incentives, and set realistic milestones.
  - For Category 1 actions, continue PMR monitoring until completion.
  - For Category 4 actions meeting five-year PMR requirement, retire from PMR but maintain oversight via principal workstreams and Board processes.
  - For Category 5 actions, retire immediately from PMR when superseded or duplicative.
- Governance and oversight:
  - OIA prepares PMRs and advises on MIP preparation and monitoring.
  - Board endorsement sought for the categorization and associated retirements/reformulations; MIP(s) for reformulated actions to be presented to the Board’s Evaluation Committee within six months of decision approval.
- Proposed decision elements (summary):
  - Thirty-eight outstanding actions assessed as on-track (Category 1).
  - Eight outstanding actions assessed as off-track and in Categories 2–3 (reformulate; MIP(s) to EVC within six months).
  - Six outstanding actions assessed as off-track and in Category 4 (retire from PMR; one action 4.3 to have monitoring extended for five additional PMR cycles).
  - Ten outstanding actions assessed as off-track and in Category 5 (retire from PMR).

### Organization, preparation, and document details
- Paper presented to the Board concurrently with the Tenth PMR; explains Framework application, presents detailed triage by Category, and proposes a Board Decision to approve categorization and retirements/reformulations.
- Approved by: Martin Mühleisen
- Prepared by: Strategy, Policy and Review Department; team led by Maria Gonzalez-Miranda with Pilar Garcia-Martinez and Yeu Jin Yung, under overall guidance of Kristina Kostial
- Date on document: February 7, 2020

*Source: ppea2020014 - Categorization of Open Actions in Management Implementation Plans (excerpt). Date: February 7, 2020.*

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

### Background
- The paper undertakes a triage of the backlog of open actions in Management Implementation Plans (MIPs) responding to recommendations by the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO), based on the Framework endorsed by the Board in March 2019.
- Periodic Monitoring Reports of the Status of MIPs (PMR) identified a backlog of actions facing serious implementation challenges.
- The Framework divides the stock of open actions into five categories based on root causes and provides guidance on tailoring remedial measures:
  - Category 1: on-track actions remain subject to regular PMR monitoring.
  - Category 2 and Category 3: reformulate within six months of approval of the proposed categorization.
  - Category 4: can be retired after five years of monitoring by the PMR.
  - Category 5: to be retired immediately from the PMR.

### Key statistics and scope
- Tenth PMR reviewed the implementation status of 62 MIP actions and assessed 24 of these as off-track.
- The Ninth PMR had assessed 32 actions as off-track; this number fell to 24 under the Tenth PMR.
- Out of a total of 62 actions, the Office of Internal Audit (OIA) assessed 38 actions to be on track.
- Of the 38 on-track actions, 16 actions were completed in the past year and are closed in the Tenth PMR.
- Most of the on-track and recently completed actions belong to MIPs published in 2018.

### Categorization process and immediate effects
- The categorization exercise applied the Board-endorsed Framework and led to increased traction of IEO recommendations:
  - Eight actions that were assessed as off-track by the Ninth PMR were brought back on track in the past year.
- The categorization is expected to be a one-off exercise because recent MIPs have been consistently aligned with the SMART (Specific, Monitorable, Attainable, Relevant and Time-bound) principles and are on-track.

### Proposed categorization and follow-up actions
- The paper places the 24 off-track actions into Categories 2–5:
  - Category 2: outcomes not achieved while guidelines are in place — proposed reformulation into new MIPs to embed incentives/enforcement and align with SMART principles.
  - Category 3: actions are not SMART — proposed reformulation into new MIPs to better align with SMART principles.
  - Category 4: long-term technical or culture change — proposed retirement from PMR after five PMR cycles of follow-up; nevertheless remain on the Fund’s agenda via principal workstreams with Board oversight.
  - Category 5: superseded, lack of value, or duplication — proposed immediate retirement from PMR.
- Specific numeric breakdown proposed in the triage:
  - Category 2: 2 actions (to be reformulated).
  - Category 3: 6 actions (to be reformulated).
  - Category 4: 6 actions (proposed to be retired from PMR).
  - Category 5: 10 actions (proposed to be retired from PMR).
- Reformulated actions in Categories 2 and 3 would be reissued as new MIPs by July 2020 and then subject to regular PMR monitoring.

### Rationale for retiring actions from PMR
- The 16 actions proposed for Categories 4 and 5 generally:
  - Remain highly relevant for the Fund.
  - Have seen substantial progress in implementation.
  - Are addressed through principal workstreams subject to robust Board oversight.
  - Retaining them under PMR monitoring would be duplicative given existing oversight and progress.

### Implementation guidance and expected outcomes
- For actions placed in Categories 2 and 3:
  - Reformulation will focus on ensuring the original IEO recommendation is effectively tackled.
  - Trade-offs and implementation constraints will be considered to develop commitments that are comprehensive, realistic, and substantive.
  - Reformulation will better embed compliance incentives and/or accountability mechanisms.
- For actions in Category 1:
  - Future PMRs will continue to monitor on-track actions until completion.

### Process and governance context
- Older MIPs (pre-2014–15 governance enhancements) account for most off-track actions; these older MIPs often suffer design weaknesses:
  - Lack of SMART features, aspirational wording, and ambitions tied to long-term culture change.
- Governance reforms since 2013–15 strengthened MIP quality, oversight (including EVC discussion and Board-level elevation of the PMR), and monitoring/reporting mechanisms:
  - OIA prepares PMRs and has played an advisory role in improving MIP preparation and monitoring.

### Organization of the paper and next steps
- The paper is presented to the Board concurrently with the Tenth PMR.
- The paper:
  - Explains the application of the Framework.
  - Presents the detailed triage by Category, including status, rationale, and tailored remedies for each off-track action.
  - Proposes a Board Decision to approve the categorization and associated retirements/reformulations.

*Source: ppea2020014 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (December 20, 2019).*

### 2.1 IMF Forecasts: Process, Quality and Country Perspectives (2015): Handover of

### 2.1 IMF Forecasts: Process, Quality and Country Perspectives (2015): Handover of Country Assignments

### Handover process: findings and rationale for reformulation
- IEO Recommendation: Enhance processes and incentives for learning from past forecast performance.
- Management Implementation Plan: Issue guidelines establishing minimum requirements and recommending best practices for the handover of country assignments.
- Findings:
  - Previous PMRs flagged insufficient compliance by country teams with handover guidelines.
  - Area Departments (ADs) issued data management guidelines including desk handover procedures in 2014, but a 2015 staff survey revealed weak compliance in practice, preventing the OIA from deeming the action as implemented.
  - The Fund’s view on forecasting has evolved from focusing on point-forecasts in macroeconomic frameworks to recognizing and addressing multiple uncertainties through risk scenarios, contingency-planning, and articulated capacity development.
  - A strong handover process supports development of accurate forecasts, high-quality risk scenarios, contingency planning, and facilitates more substantive engagement with country authorities.
- Revised action focus:
  - Enhance knowledge and information-sharing practices across successive country teams.
  - Leverage Knowledge Management Unit (KMU) efforts, including revamping Knowledge Exchange (KE) country-pages to connect current and past country teams and provide a one-stop portal for country engagement and key documentation around surveillance, lending, and CD.
  - KMU conducted a new survey of AD economists and mission chiefs to diagnose main “pain-points” in the handover process.
- Pain-points identified (survey summary):
  - Strongest around the technical handover (file structure, data).
  - Next: need for more information on key contacts and relationships, and past correspondence/exchanges of views with authorities not available in document form.
  - Preferred solutions: comprehensive handover notes (one AD is piloting such notes), more coordinated institutional succession planning allowing overlap and shadowing, and handover missions or overlap periods—though overlap has high resource implications.
- Concrete actions envisaged:
  - ADs, in collaboration with KMU, to ensure knowledge acquired by country teams is accurately and timely captured, easily shared, and more consistently used by onboarding country teams.
  - Use ongoing handover enhancement efforts to support Bank-Fund information sharing practices.

*Italicized source: Excerpt from the PMR chapter on "IMF Forecasts: Process, Quality and Country Perspectives (2015): Handover of Country Assignments."*

---

### 2.2 The Role of the Fund as a Trusted Advisor (2013): Country Assignment Tenure

### Tenure objective, findings, and reformulation approach
- IEO Recommendation: Strengthen the continuity of the relationship between the Fund and member countries.
- Management Implementation Plan: Target three years average tenure for country assignments to be monitored by HRD.
- Findings:
  - PMRs observed little progress in achieving a three-year average tenure in country assignments.
  - Mission chief tenure is included in the Accountability Framework Scorecard and reported twice a year by the Human Resource Department (HRD) to management.
  - Tenure for mission chiefs has hovered at two and a half years since 2013.
  - Only MCD achieved an average tenure of mission chiefs of three years in Fiscal Year (FY) 2019.
  - The data to monitor turnover for desk economists is less reliable and has not been consistently used to monitor tenures.
  - Challenges to ensuring longer tenures include promotions and mobility needs (especially for lower grades), structural constraints from career progression (promotion and retirement), other HR objectives (policies to foster staff mobility), and the need to preserve flexibility in allocation of scarce resources.
  - FY2019 covers May 2018–April 2019.
- Reformulation intent:
  - Reformulate the action (or set of actions) to ensure continuity of the relationship between the Fund and member countries while balancing tradeoffs.
  - Design will require further diagnosis and should leverage new initiatives under the HR Strategy, including forthcoming Career Playbook and Mobility Framework and Career Paths for Economists expected in FY2020.
  - Design could draw lessons from MCD’s staffing model and departments where rotation pressures have eased.

*Italicized source: Excerpt from the PMR chapter on "The Role of the Fund as a Trusted Advisor (2013): Country Assignment Tenure."*

---

### Category 3: Actions not SMART — Data management and related actions (3.1–3.6)

### 3.1 Common Surveillance Database (CSD)
- IEO Recommendation: Reexamine the staff’s structure of incentives in the area of data management.
- Management Implementation Plan: Incentivize the use of the Common Surveillance Database (CSD).
- Findings:
  - Action as written does not tackle the intended objective and cannot be monitored meaningfully.
  - Improvements in the CSD have led to an increase in demand, but it is unclear whether this achieved the IEO’s intended objective of improved data management.
- Revised action:
  - Focus on data management and mainstream good practices by ensuring CSD use is properly monitored, with periodic reports on usage delivered to the Fund’s Data Governance Group (DGG).
- Note: The CSD is well integrated with ADs’ workflow and used for analytical work and flagships including REOs, WEO, and the Vulnerability Exercise.

### 3.2 Catalogue of Time Series (CTS)
- IEO Recommendation: Reexamine staff incentives in data management.
- Management Implementation Plan: Update the Catalogue of Time Series.
- Findings:
  - Lack of specificity prevents determination of implementation status.
  - Progress: updates of real, external, and financial sectors catalogues completed; fiscal sector catalogue expected to be done by end-FY2020.
  - The action is not fully SMART, making progress difficult to monitor.
- Revised action:
  - Leverage ongoing update of CTS: STA and RES launched a “cleanup review” of “CTS 3.0” in May 2017; review expected to be completed by end-2023 with an updated “CTS 4.0.”
  - Use milestones under this review to ensure strong data management.

### 3.3 Metadata Cleanup (first instance)
- IEO Recommendation: Reexamine staff incentives in data management.
- Management Implementation Plan: Undertake a metadata cleanup.
- Findings:
  - Action does not specify when implementation would be deemed complete.
  - Cleanup is comprehensive, involving over 200 databases.
  - A first cleanup completed in 2018 focusing on economic variables in staff reports (SRs); a more comprehensive cleanup envisaged over a longer horizon.
- Revised action:
  - Embed the metadata cleanup in DGG’s work; it is on the DGG’s “absolute priority list” and will align with near-term DGG milestones.

### 3.4 Adopt Fund-wide data management standards
- IEO Recommendation: Reexamine staff incentives in data management.
- Management Implementation Plan: Adopt Fund-wide data management standards.
- Findings:
  - Action is broadly worded and long-term; adoption is likely a long-lived effort as data needs evolve.
  - Earlier PMRs acknowledged progress toward developing Fund-wide standards (e.g., unifying AD data management guidelines, consistent series descriptions, common metadata fields).
- Revised action:
  - Break down the process into substantive, front-loaded milestones.

### 3.5 Confidential Information handling
- IEO Recommendation: Reduce unnecessary disclosure concerns that may inhibit authorities from using the Fund as a sounding board for informal advice.
- Management Implementation Plan: Staff to inform authorities of the Fund’s policy on treatment of confidential information; staff encouraged to have informal/brainstorming discussions with country authorities.
- Findings:
  - PMRs could not assess implementation.
  - Guidance issued in 2013 asked teams to make members aware of the Fund’s policy and encouraged informal/brainstorming sessions.
  - 2013 Review of the Transparency Policy and the 2014 Guidance Note sought to enhance traction and candid interactions.
  - No mechanism exists to assess staff’s treatment of confidential information or whether/how it is discussed with authorities.
  - Informal/brainstorming discussions are difficult to monitor and may not always be possible or appropriate.
- Revised action proposals:
  - Ensure staff appropriately keeps authorities informed about Fund policies on confidential information, possibly aided by written communication shareable with authorities.
  - Extend the annual Survey of the Offices of the Executive Directors (OEDs) to monitor members’ satisfaction with handling of confidential information and to seek views on whether informal/brainstorming discussions took place and were useful.

### 3.6 Working Papers quality control
- IEO Recommendation: Management and staff need to allocate adequate time and resources to each research project; IMF needs clear standards for technical quality and incentives to improve research quality.
- Management Implementation Plan: Adopt new procedures to ensure the quality of working papers.
- Findings:
  - The action’s measure of success is unclear.
  - Guidelines on working papers introduced in 2012 require originating departments to certify quality before issuance (via Division Chief or other senior staff).
  - Measuring and monitoring quality of individual working papers beyond these guidelines is costly and not feasible within PMR’s scope.
- Revised action:
  - Propose a measurable deliverable balancing nature of WPs and resource constraints with need for quality control.
  - Consider enhancing dissemination of guidelines and transparently posting departmental procedures for approving WPs to strengthen accountability of staff who approve WPs.
- Note: Publication guidelines request notification to Executive Directors; authors must confirm via a checklist that a copy has been sent to concerned Executive Director(s) along with a memo; Directors normally have 10 working days to respond.

*Italicized source: Excerpt from the PMR chapter "Category 3. Actions are not SMART" covering actions 3.1–3.6.*

---

### Category 4: Long-term technical or culture change (actions 4.1–4.2 and retirement rationale)

### Nature and monitoring challenges
- Actions originate from 2012 MIP on IMF Performance in the Run-up to the Financial and Economic Crisis: IMF Surveillance, and 2013 MIP on The Role of the Fund as a Trusted Advisor.
- These actions aimed to improve value added, traction, and quality of Fund surveillance and are central to the Fund’s agenda.
- PMRs could not deem these actions implemented because technical and culture change is difficult to measure and progress is gradual.
- Framework approach: PMRs monitor progress for five reporting cycles following MIP approval date; management expected to propose retiring the action from PMR monitoring after that period.
- Staff proposes to retire all actions in this Category from PMR monitoring because:
  - Actions have met the five-year PMR reporting requirement (belong to MIPs endorsed in 2012 and 2013).
  - Substantive progress has been achieved since IEO recommendations in 2011–12.
  - Dedicated workstreams and monitoring mechanisms now exist with robust Board oversight, so further PMR follow-up would be duplicative.

### Specific actions 4.1–4.2: Early consultations and sharing assumptions
- 4.1 IEO Recommendation: Enhance the value-added of Article IV consultations for country authorities.
  - Management Implementation Plan: Early consultations with country authorities will now be expected of all teams.
- 4.2 IEO Recommendation: Enhance the value-added of Article IV consultations for country authorities.
  - Management Implementation Plan: Mission teams will be expected to share major policy questions and global assumptions underlying projections at least one week ahead of the mission.
- Findings:
  - These actions sought to embed early and high-quality policy consultations and sharing of major policy questions and assumptions ahead of Article IV missions.
  - Guidance issued in 2013 sought to embed these behaviors.
  - PMRs were unable to assess whether these actions were implemented because they are continuous, seek to ingrain behaviors, lack clear measures of success, and were monitored mainly through the annual OED Survey.
  - The OED Survey consistently showed high satisfaction with mission team engagement, but PMRs saw scope for more consistent engagement and noted robustness issues with the survey response methodology.

*Italicized source: Excerpt from the PMR chapter "Category 4. Long-term Technical or Culture Change" and actions 4.1–4.2.*

### 36.      The revised 2019 OED Survey showed that desired behaviors are well-entrenched.

### 36.      The revised 2019 OED Survey showed that desired behaviors are well-entrenched.

### 2019 OED Survey — findings on interactions and satisfaction
- Most teams (i) engage in an early exchange of views (spanning the 1–2 months prior to the Article IV mission) on key surveillance policy issues (4.1); and (ii) routinely share major policy questions and assumptions with the authorities and/or OEDs at least one week before the Article IV mission (4.2).
- The Survey showed a high overall degree of satisfaction (above 90 percent) with the substance of surveillance.
- OEDs particularly appreciated the staff’s candid and open exchange of views, suggesting important progress by mission chiefs in explaining the rationale of the Fund’s policy advice.
- The revised survey achieved a high response rate of 80, with 152 countries providing individual feedback, both quantitative and qualitative, in contrast with a response rate of 75 percent in 2018, based on 71 responses representing a total 141 countries.

### Proposal regarding PMR monitoring for early interactions
- Staff proposes to retire actions 4.1 and 4.2 from PMR monitoring.
- Rationale:
  - The 2019 Survey results confirm that early and substantive interactions are the norm.
  - These Surveys will be continued (and updated as needed) to assess the quality of interaction between staff and country authorities as well as OED offices.

### Action 4.3 — Regional and Gender Diversity (The Role of the Fund as a Trusted Advisor, 2013)
- IEO Recommendation: Strengthen the continuity of the relationship between the Fund and member countries.
- Management Implementation Plan: Implement measures to raise the share of nationals from underrepresented regions (URR) among senior staff and set targets for representation of women at senior levels.

Findings and metrics
- PMRs could not deem this action as implemented because:
  - Action 4.3 has a continuous, open-ended formulation and lacks benchmarks.
  - Earlier OED Surveys were broadly worded and sought responses from multi-country constituencies instead of individual countries.
- Progress documented:
  - Compared to 2012, substantive increase in awareness and focused efforts.
  - The share of female B-level staff increased by almost 50 percent since 2012.
  - The share of Under-Represented Region (URR) nationals rose to 26 percent over the past five years, with a number of ratios exceeding 80 percent of the 2020 Benchmarks.
  - The share of women economists at the B-level reached 27 percent, surpassing the benchmark of 25 percent.
  - The share of all female B-level staff at 30 percent is right at the benchmark.

Planned oversight, targets, and initiatives
- Management and the Board will continue to monitor efforts to broaden URR and gender diversity.
- Diversity objectives are integrated into the Accountability Framework and the HR Strategy.
- The 2025 Diversity Benchmarks Working Group will recommend new benchmarks/targets for gender and regional representation to be achieved by end FY 2025.
- Departments will develop action plans starting in FY20 to support compliance with Accountability Framework benchmarks.
- Twice-yearly discussions between Heads of Departments and management will review action plans and ensure follow-up.
- The Diversity and Inclusion Report and periodic reporting to the Board by HRD provide oversight mechanisms.
- OEDs receive quarterly data updates and, with the Workday rollout, will have access to a diversity dashboard in real time.

Actions to source and hire diverse staff
- Initiatives include:
  - Expanding the sourcing of URR nationals, particularly women from URRs to all A9–B5 roles across career streams, with emphasis on the A13-A15 levels.
  - Continued use of the Economist and Mid-Career Programs to ensure diversity in candidates and hires.
  - Encouraging URR countries to set up scholarship and/or sponsorship programs for women from URRs and offering a guaranteed internship at the Fund.
  - Encouraging advanced economies to allocate part of their contributions to the Externally Financed Appointee program to fund candidates from URRs.

Recommendation on PMR monitoring
- Staff proposes to retire action 4.3 from PMR monitoring.
- Rationale:
  - Substantive progress achieved and a dedicated workstream with management and Board oversight is in place (including Diversity and Inclusion Reports to the Board).
  - The IEO is considering preparing an update of its evaluation on The Role of the Fund as a Trusted Advisor in the next couple of years.

### Actions 4.4–4.5 — Professional Diversity: Financial Sector Expertise (IMF Surveillance, 2012)
- IEO Recommendations:
  - 4.4: Change the insular culture of the IMF through broadening the professional diversity of the staff, in particular by hiring more financial sector experts, analysts with financial markets experience, and economists with policy making backgrounds.
  - 4.5: Strengthen financial sector expertise in the IMF by updating the staff’s knowledge through training and by hiring experienced market participants. Missions to G20 economies and other financial centers should include experienced financial experts.
- Management Implementation Plan for both: Continue to broaden the professional diversity of staff, including their educational background and skill mix. HRD will provide regular reports to the Board.

Assessment and progress
- PMRs could not assess whether these actions were met because the actions are continuous and duplicative.
- Marked progress made on broadening professional diversity since these evaluations:
  - Mid-career hires averaged 78 percent in the past five years.
  - Nearly 40 percent of these hires were by the Monetary and Capital Markets Department (MCM).
  - About a quarter of all new hires had macro-financial expertise.
  - Financial sector experts in the Fund tripled in the last decade.
- Mid-career hiring is a proxy for professional diversity, bringing staff with hands-on experience from governments or the private sector and broader educational backgrounds.

Ongoing measures and oversight
- Workforce Planning under the HR Strategy will foster financial sector expertise and professional diversity.
- The Diversity and Inclusion Reports ensure regular updates and Board oversight.
- HRD will build labor market business intelligence for needed specialists and leverage social media (in particular LinkedIn) for sourcing candidates.
- The 2018 IEO evaluation on The IMF and Financial Surveillance led to an associated MIP with actions to develop financial expertise that supersede actions 4.4–4.5.

Recommendation on PMR monitoring
- Staff recommends retiring actions 4.4–4.5 from PMR monitoring due to substantive progress and supersession by broader MIP actions.

### Action 4.6 — Linkages, Spillovers and Cross-Country Experience (IMF Surveillance, 2012)
- IEO Recommendation: Management should clarify the rules and responsibilities for the internal review process, in particular for “connecting the dots.”
- Management Implementation Plan: Better analyze linkages and spillovers across sectors and countries, as well as bring more cross-country experience to bear (as included in the 2011 TSR).

Assessment and progress
- PMRs were not able to assess success because the action is broad, qualitative, and not time-bound.
- Substantive achievements relative to 2011 include progress on analysis and discussion of linkages and spillovers, building on the 2011 and 2014 Triennial Surveillance Reviews (TSRs).
- The Tenth PMR noted steps to address coverage of outward spillovers flagged by the 2018 Interim Surveillance Review (ISR).

Planned workstreams and oversight
- Staff proposes to retire action 4.6 from PMR monitoring.
- Rationale and follow-up:
  - Spillovers, linkages and leveraging cross-country policy experiences are core to the Fund’s work and are addressed through Surveillance Reviews, allowing Board guidance and oversight.
  - The 2020 CSR will focus on spillovers and linkages, including early engagement with members on policies generating outward spillovers and discussion of policies to avert or alleviate them.
  - The CSR will note that better leveraging cross-country policy experiences will make Fund policy advice more persuasive and seek to enhance discussion on cross-cutting issues.
  - Emphasis on continued efforts on knowledge and data management (see action 5.7 discussion).
  - Revised surveillance guidance note will reflect surveillance priorities following Board guidance.
  - The MIP on The IMF Advice on Unconventional Monetary Policies contains actions to improve the Fund’s financial spillover analyses.

### Category 5 — Superseded, Lack of Value, and Duplication (overview)
- Staff proposes to include ten actions in Category 5 (5.1–5.10) from six IEO evaluations.
- Rationale:
  - Many of these actions remain highly relevant but have been superseded by broader workstreams or more recent MIPs, making PMR monitoring redundant.
  - A couple of actions would not be cost-effective to implement.

Examples of Category 5 actions discussed
- 5.1 The IMF and the Crisis in Greece, Ireland and Portugal (2017): Analytical Underpinnings of Surveillance and Program Design
  - IEO Recommendation: Management should develop procedures to minimize the room for political intervention in the IMF’s technical analysis.
  - Management Implementation Plan: Ensure continuous improvements in analytical underpinnings of surveillance and program design, especially economic forecasting, external sector assessments, and integrated surveillance.
  - Staff proposes to retire this action from the PMR because it is being addressed through comprehensive workstreams:
    - CSR will explore realigning surveillance priorities and engagement modalities.
    - Joint IMF-WB LIC DSF and reviews of MAC DSA and the Debt Limits Policy will strengthen toolkit and guidance.
    - EBA and EBA-lite toolkits have been revised.
    - Work on the Integrated Policy Framework (IPF) is expected to sharpen assessment of effective policy mixes.
    - Review of Conditionality (RoC) examined program performance and a guidance note is in preparation.

- 5.2 Behind the Scenes with Data at the IMF (2017): CD in Fragile States and Vulnerable Countries
  - IEO Recommendation: Reconsider the role and mandate of the Statistics department.
  - Management Implementation Plan: Devote greater attention to CD in Fragile States (FCS) and vulnerable program countries, and foster integration with surveillance.
  - Staff proposes to retire this action as superseded by more comprehensive MIPs on The IMF and Fragile States and other workstreams:
    - STA has leveraged multi-partner vehicles like the Data for Decisions (D4D) Fund and the Financial Sector Stability Fund (FSSF).
    - These trust funds align CD financing with member needs and IMF surveillance priorities, addressing data gaps in low and low-middle income countries and FCS.
    - CD results: 27 low-income or fragile countries that subscribed to the enhanced General Data Dissemination System (e-GDDS) have begun publishing macroeconomic data through a National Summary Data Page.

- 5.3 IMF Response to the Financial and Economic Crisis (2015): Embed Macro-Financial Analysis in Article IV Surveillance
  - IEO Recommendation: Update annually the Financial Sector Assessment Programs (FSAPs) for the world’s five to seven largest systemic financial centers in conjunction with IMF bilateral surveillance.
  - Management Implementation Plan: Introduce measures to fully embed macro-financial analysis in Article IV surveillance, including through balance sheet analysis (BSA) and promoting uptake of user-friendly tools.

*Source: ppea2020014 - 36.      The revised 2019 OED Survey showed that desired behaviors are well-entrenched.*

### 51.      Staff proposes to retire this action given an overlap with other efforts. The 2020 CSR

### 51.      Staff proposes to retire this action given an overlap with other efforts. The 2020 CSR

### Rationale for retiring the action
- Staff proposes to retire this action because it overlaps with other efforts: the 2020 CSR and Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) Reviews will seek to further embed macro-financial analysis in surveillance and highlight the need to maintain a relevant and modern toolkit.
- The 2019 MIP on the IMF Financial Surveillance includes actions to ensure the CSR and FSAP Reviews address specific IEO recommendations on strengthening financial and macro-financial analysis, and refocusing FSAP country selection and scope, allowing for monitoring of updated commitments by the PMR.
- Specific actions cited (from the MIP) include:
  - (i) the 2018 CD Strategy Review to include an assessment of initiatives to better integrate CD and surveillance, including in FCS (November 2018);
  - (ii) a report to management on the case for establishing a dedicated multi-donor trust fund (MDTF) or a coordinated set of projects to target CD gaps (September 2019);
  - (iii) a staff paper for Board discussion with analysis of experience and lessons from building financial and statistical capacity in FCS (December 2019).
- The D4D was launched in mid-2018 with a workplan supporting urgent member needs based on vulnerabilities (example: on debt data to ensure that risks to fiscal sustainability from public sector debt can be addressed speedily).
- The actions include an updated guidance note on surveillance containing practical steps to implement the Board-approved CSR recommendations.

### Forecasts: process improvements and retirement recommendations (Actions 5.4–5.6)
- 5.4 (Forecast Errors)
  - IEO Recommendation: Enhance processes and incentives for learning from past forecast performance.
  - Management Implementation Plan: Policy consultation meetings for Article IV consultations and program reviews will discuss underlying causes of significant forecast errors (not pertaining to data revisions) for key macroeconomic variables.
  - Staff recommends retiring this action as superseded. Major work completed in response to the MIP has enhanced learning from forecast errors.
  - Toolkits have been revamped to embed an automatic analysis of the quality of the projections; these toolkits are widely used.
  - Examples: LIC DSF and MAC DSA include “realism tools” which provide an immediate view of the quality of the forecasts used in these exercises (and are transparently published along with the DSAs); the ongoing update to the MAC DSA will expand on this further.
  - These tools have substantially improved the quality of discussions on forecasts during Policy Consultation Meetings (PCMs).
  - The Fund is broadening forecasting through use of risk scenarios and contingency-planning. Further guidance will be provided through follow-up work to the RoC and CSR.

- 5.5 (Pilot Process for Medium-Term Forecasts)
  - IEO Recommendation: Extend guidance to desk economists about how best to incorporate advances in forecasting methodologies for short- and medium-term forecasts.
  - Management Implementation Plan: RES will start a pilot process (to be broadened gradually for most major economies and country groups) with top-down guidance for medium-term forecasts in the spirit of the approach used for short-term forecasts.

- 5.6 (A Multi-Country Macro-Econometric Forecasting Model)
  - IEO Recommendation: Extend guidance to desk economists about how best to incorporate advances in forecasting methodologies for short- and medium-term forecasts.
  - Management Implementation Plan: Develop a multi-country macro-econometric forecasting model to ensure medium-term consistency of forecasts.
  - Staff proposes to retire these actions as superseded by new priorities within the Fund’s budget constraint.
  - The Ninth PMR noted that extending the model from a successful pilot for some large economies to all G-20 countries would “require simulation capabilities beyond what is currently technically feasible or efficient.”
  - Developing a multi-country macro-forecasting model is a more advanced stage of the pilot and would be too complex and time consuming; further investment would divert scarce resources from other Board-endorsed priorities.

### Cross-country examples and traction (Actions 5.7–5.8)
- 5.7 (Cross-Country Examples)
  - IEO Recommendation: Enhance the value-added of Article IV consultations for country authorities.
  - Management Implementation Plan: Enhance the use of cross-country examples by functional department economists.
  - Staff proposes to retire this action as superseded by other workstreams.
  - The 2020 CSR will discuss leveraging cross-country experience to enhance the quality and persuasiveness of policy advice.
  - The KMU has identified cross-country knowledge sharing as a priority and set up a centralized repository and topic tagging, including a platform for country missions and associated documents (such as CD and FSAP documents) that allows teams to access information on countries with similar economic characteristics.
  - Functional departments have produced topical papers featuring cross-country analysis and comparisons; efforts will continue, including tapping into cognitive computing services to boost teams’ access to CD and cross-country policy experiences. These efforts will be regularly reported to the Board under established mechanisms, including for KMU.

- 5.8 (Traction)
  - IEO Recommendation: Management should encourage staff to ask questions and challenge management’s views and those of country authorities; well-founded analysis should be supported by management and the Board even when the diagnosis might not be shared by country authorities.
  - Management Implementation Plan: Staff will report on the traction of past advice.
  - Staff proposes to retire this action as superseded by the 2020 CSR.
  - The action lacked a measure of success; PMRs found it difficult to gauge implementation, although monitoring of traction in staff reports (SRs) improved significantly since the IEO evaluation, particularly in response to the 2011 TSR.
  - The CSR will propose a more comprehensive concept of traction, including new measurements centered on the Fund’s ability to add value to the policy dialogue and influence policy debates evenhandedly; follow-up on implementing the new concept will occur in the CSR context.

### FSAP-related actions and thematic work (Actions 5.9–5.10)
- 5.9 (Cross-Country Lessons from FSAPs)
  - IEO Recommendation: Continue to strengthen the FSAPs and address problems which limited its effectiveness in the run-up to the crisis.
  - Management Implementation Plan: Intensify efforts to draw cross-country lessons from FSAPs.
- 5.10 (Training, Tools, Thematic Studies)
  - IEO Recommendation: Continue to strengthen the FSAPs and address problems which limited its effectiveness in the run-up to the crisis.
  - Management Implementation Plan: Coverage of financial issues in Article IVs will be strengthened by stepped-up training and dissemination of vetted tools and good practices, as well as cross-country thematic studies.
- Staff recommends retiring these actions as superseded by various workstreams.
  - PMRs could not close these actions due to their continuous nature and lack of SMART features.
  - Reasons for retiring:
    - These actions belong to a 2011 IEO evaluation focusing largely on macro-financial surveillance, which has been superseded by the recent IEO evaluation on IMF Financial Surveillance; the corresponding MIP includes actions to strengthen financial and macro-financial analysis in surveillance (including through CSR and FSAP Reviews).
    - Efforts to step up dissemination of cross-country lessons, including on FSAPs, are well entrenched; the CSR will look into enhancing discussions on cross-cutting themes (see action 5.7).

### Proposed triage and decision outcomes (conclusion and proposed decision)
- The paper proposes a categorization to address off-track MIP actions, based on the Framework to Address Open Management Actions in Response to Board-Endorsed IEO Recommendations, to strengthen traction by prioritizing actions lacking direct or comprehensive oversight mechanisms.
- Most actions proposed to be “retired” remain highly relevant; principal workstreams have been established allowing for Board oversight; retaining these actions in the PMR would be redundant.
- The triage proposes to retire from the PMR about two-thirds of the off-track actions with the remainder to be reformulated.
- Specific proposed decision elements:
  - Thirty-eight of the outstanding actions have been assessed as “on-track” and fall under Category 1.
  - Eight of the outstanding actions have been assessed as “off-track” and fall under Categories 2–3; these will be reformulated and the MIP(s) presented to the Board’s Evaluation Committee no later than six months from the date of approval of this decision.
  - Six of the outstanding actions have been assessed as “off-track” and fall under Category 4; they have met the five-year PMR reporting requirement and have been substituted by other implementation workstreams and monitoring mechanisms and will be retired from PMR monitoring going forward.
  - Ten of the outstanding actions have been assessed as “off-track” and fall under Category 5; they are superseded by new workstreams and will be retired.

*Source: ppea2020014 - 51.      Staff proposes to retire this action given an overlap with other efforts. The 2020 CSR*

### 1.11 The HR Strategy Review will

### 1.11 The HR Strategy Review will

### Human resources, staffing, and fragile states
- Action: HR Strategy Review will look into strategic workforce and career planning including recruitment.
- Objective: Ensure the Fund has appropriate staff expertise and experience to work effectively in fragile states, including the introduction of a “career playbook” to incentivize staff to work on FCS.
- Accountable department / timeline: HRD End-2020
- Related action: 1.12 Report to management on FCS staffing gaps, notably for staff assigned from functional departments in program and near-program countries.
  - Accountable departments: FAD, SPR, OBP
  - Due date: Oct. 2018

### Social protection — strategic framework, guidance, and operational support
- 1.13 Staff will prepare a Board paper on the strategic framework on social protection issues.
  - Scope: Delineate the scope, objectives, and boundaries of Fund engagement in social protection and provide guidance for implementation of other IEO evaluation recommendations.
  - Accountable departments: FAD, SPR, COM
  - Due date: Jan. 2018
  - Board date: April 2019
- 1.14 Staff will issue a follow-up guidance note to support the strategic framework for social protection.
  - Purpose: Address aspects of three of the IEO recommendations.
  - Accountable departments: FAD, SPR
  - Due date: End-2020
- 1.15 An advisory group will be formed after issuance of the guidance note to provide support to country teams in operationalizing work on social protection.
  - Accountable department: FAD
  - Due date: Not indicated
- 1.16 Staff will receive training if needed.
  - Accountable departments: FAD, ICD
  - Due date: Not indicated
- 1.17 Staff will issue a guidance note on strengthening social safeguards measures in low-income country programs.
  - Accountable department: SPR
  - Due date: First half of 2018
- 1.18 The 2018 Review of Conditionality will assess effectiveness of Fund conditionality on social protection.
  - Accountable department: SPR
  - Board date: Nov. 2018
- 1.19 More staff resources will be allocated to enhance external communications in this area; appropriate communications products will be developed with departments.
  - Accountable department: COM
  - Due date: Not indicated
- 1.20 IMF senior-level staff will attend SPIAC-B meetings when the issue under discussion is relevant to Fund’s work.
  - Accountable departments: SPR, FAD
  - Due date: Not indicated

### Data standards, statistical work, and surveillance
- 1.21 The Tenth Review of the IMF’s Data Standards Initiatives will seek to further align data provision by member countries with publication of data required for surveillance by the Fund.
  - Accountable departments: STA, SPR
  - Due date: Mar. 2017 FY2019
- 1.22 The Tenth Review will seek to merge SDDS, SDDS Plus, and e-GDDS frameworks and include new technologies for data provision, such as open data.
  - Accountable departments: STA, SPR
  - Due date: FY2020
- 1.23 Review of Standards and Codes Initiative to strengthen integration with Fund surveillance and capacity development; the new Data ROSC will guide future capacity development and methodological work.
  - Accountable department: STA
  - Due date: FY2018
- 1.24 Revisit role and mandate of STA to ensure alignment with Fund core operations; decision on moving new data management structure into STA to be taken in context of long-term strategy.
  - Accountable department: STA
  - Due date: Sept. 2017
- 1.25 Review data publications, databases, and data sharing within the membership and among international agencies.
  - Accountable department: STA
  - Due date: N/A
- 1.26 Unify area department data management guidelines.
  - Accountable department: STA
  - Due date: Not indicated
- 1.27 Next Review of Data Provision to the Fund for Surveillance Purposes (DPF) will propose how to incorporate results of new assessments of data adequacy for surveillance into a revised Statistical Issues appendix (SIA) and review requirement to discuss the SIA in the main body of the Article IV staff report.
  - Accountable departments: STA, SPR
  - Due date: FY2019
- 1.28 Develop a plan to clarify distinction between “official statistics” and data used by area and functional departments in surveillance activities.
  - Accountable departments: STA, ITD
  - Due date: N/A
- 1.29 STA will engage in more pro-active and structured consultation with area departments on methodological work to support surveillance priorities for LICs; enhanced guidance will be provided for compiling data on LICs.
  - Accountable department: STA
  - Due date: N/A
- 1.30 Comprehensive Surveillance Reviews (CSR) and interim reports will continue to guide priorities regarding the Fund’s evolving data and statistical needs; operationalized in Reviews of Data Provision to the Fund for Surveillance Purposes (DPF).
  - Accountable departments: STA, SPR
  - Due date: Dec. 2017
- 1.31 Ongoing efforts to align capacity development activities with Fund and membership needs will continue; CD will be geared to closing data gaps hampering surveillance, improving data quality, and broadening data dissemination.
  - Accountable departments: STA, ICD
  - Due date: N/A

### Knowledge management, evaluation, and research
- 1.32 Develop a plan to enhance knowledge management (KM).
  - Expected actions: (i) produce concrete plans to make available high-quality, web-based information on critical topics for Fund staff; (ii) enhance internal information classification and retrieval tools; (iii) provide recommendations on responsibilities of area, functional, and other departments, and each staff member, in strengthening KM; (iv) propose a permanent KM structure.
  - Accountable department: KMU
  - Due date: June 2016
  - Due date status: N/A
- 1.33 Develop a common evaluation framework, including self-evaluation, for IMFCD.
  - Accountable department: ICD
  - Due date: N/A
- 1.34 Commissioned studies will be undertaken on a regular schedule, every 5~8 years, starting 2015.
  - Accountable department: RES
  - Due date: Oct. 2015 End-2015
- 1.35 Emphasize and monitor the role of OED in liaison process through an annual survey.
  - Due date: May 2013 Begin in April 2014
  - Accountable: N/A
- 1.36 Mission chiefs will be tasked to better explain the rationale for Fund policy advice.
  - Accountable departments: SPR, ADs
  - Due date: Beginning 2013

### Workplace values, staff inputs, and mission engagement
- 1.37 Publish a statement of workplace values emphasizing staff contribution of ideas to departmental work programs, even if not aligned with Fund “groupthink.”
  - Accountable departments: COM, HRD, All Departments
  - Due date: Nov. 2012
  - Due date status: N/A
- 1.38 Staff will exchange views with authorities on key issues for discussion prior to Article IV missions, without compromising IMF’s obligation to raise relevant and sometimes difficult issues.
  - Accountable departments: SPR, ADs
  - Due date: Feb. 2012
  - Due date status: N/A

### Categorization of open actions, diversity, and Board decisions
- Supplement and revised proposed decision addresses action 4.3 on regional and gender diversity and proposes retaining the action under PMR monitoring for an additional period of five PMR reporting cycles to allow more time to strengthen diversity at the Fund.
- Key points from the Revised Proposed Decision:
  - (i) Board endorsed classification of outstanding actions under Categories 1–5 of the Triage Framework.
  - (ii) Specific allocations:
    - Thirty-eight outstanding actions assessed as “on-track” and falling under Category 1.
    - Eight outstanding actions assessed as “off-track” and falling under Categories 2–3; these will be reformulated and implemented through one or more Management Actions Plans; MIP(s) to be presented to the Board’s Evaluation Committee no later than six months from approval of the decision.
    - Six outstanding actions assessed as “off-track” and falling under Category 4; five of six have met the five-year PMR reporting requirement and will be retired from PMR monitoring; one action (action 4.3 on regional and gender diversity) will have annual monitoring extended for five additional PMR cycles.
    - Ten outstanding actions assessed as “off-track” and falling under Category 5 and assessed to be superseded by new workstreams; these will be retired from PMR monitoring.
- Approved by: Martin Mühleisen
- Prepared by: Strategy, Policy and Review Department in consultation with other departments; team led by Maria Gonzalez-Miranda and consisting of Pilar Garcia-Martinez and Yeu Jin Yung, under overall guidance of Kristina Kostial
- Date on document: February 7, 2020

*Categorization of Open Actions in Management Implementation Plans (excerpt).*

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/pp/2020/english/ppea2020014.pdf_