## ppea2022001 — EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [ppea2022001 — EXECUTIVE SUMMARY](https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/pp/2022/english/ppea2022001.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/files/publications/pp/2022/english/ppea2022001.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/files/publications/pp/2022/english/ppea2022001.pdf.json)

---

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY — key points and proposed reforms
- Rationale:
  - The IMF’s capacity development (CD) information dissemination policy needs to adapt as the Fund provides more CD and more diverse CD-related information while members, partners, and other CD providers increasingly expect greater transparency and access to information.
  - The 2018 CD Strategy Review advocated wider dissemination while protecting staff candor and the Fund’s role as trusted advisor.
- Expected benefits of wider dissemination:
  - Fostering stronger ownership.
  - Improving coordination internally and with other CD providers and financing partners.
  - Promoting accountability.
  - Advancing the Fund’s contribution to knowledge as a global public good.
- Specific envisaged reforms:
  - Create a category of “final CD output,” expanding coverage to all CD information, including TA advice, training, and other CD outputs.
  - Move toward default publication of high-level summaries of strategic final CD outputs on a lapse-of-time basis with streamlined internal processes for producing such summaries.
  - Eliminate post-transmittal corrections and deletions (with narrow exceptions) to simplify publication.
  - Improve integration with surveillance by enabling CD staff to share CD information relevant to program work or surveillance with other departments.
  - Shorten timelines for lapse-of-time consent and introduce Fund-wide norms to reduce dissemination delays to direct financing partners and Executive Directors.
  - Clarify dissemination rules for Fund assessment/evaluation information and CDMAP information beyond Fund staff.
- Administrative details:
  - Date on document page: January 7, 2022.
  - Approved by: Roger Nord and Rhoda Weeks-Brown.
  - Prepared by: Institute for Capacity Development (ICD) and Legal Department in consultation with other departments; under the guidance of Michaela Erbenova (ICD) and Bernhard Steinki (LEG).

### CONTEXT, PRINCIPLES, AND CONSENT FRAMEWORK
- Context:
  - Current framework originates from a 2008 background paper formalized in 2009 Operational Guidelines (updated 2013 and 2020).
  - CD has grown in scale and diversity (Figure 1 references CD spending in millions of USD); new delivery modalities (online training, virtual CD) and more diverse outputs have emerged.
  - External expectations for transparency have increased; Executive Directors encouraged innovative approaches to raise awareness of CD work while preserving confidentiality and client trust.
- Core balance to preserve:
  - Maintain Fund’s trusted advisor role and staff candor.
  - Safeguard non-public information.
  - Recognize resource implications of wider dissemination (staff time, translation needs).
- Consent framework and terminology:
  - Clarifies which final CD outputs require consent.
  - Replaces broad “confidential” label (outside GAO classification) with “non-public” or “sensitive” to characterize information requiring non-objection or explicit consent.
  - Dissemination remains voluntary for recipient and authoring department; ex-ante consent assumed in limited circumstances.
  - Management intends to amend Operational Guidelines, circulate to the Board for information, and publish; management authority generally extends to department heads under GAO 35, Rev. 2.

### ISSUES WITH THE CURRENT POLICY — identified shortcomings and findings
- General assessment:
  - Increased access to most TA reports for financing partners and the Executive Board, sharing of technical notes, manuals, analytical tools, and launch of public products (Policy Issue Notes, RCDC annual reports).
  - Remaining challenges include gaps in coverage, low publication rates of TA reports, rising staff burden, and lack of clarity on certain categories of CD information.
- Key specific findings and statistics:
  - A. Some CD outputs not covered:
    - Training accounts for 14 percent of all CD delivery and produces shareable outputs (subject to copyright rules).
    - Online training (introduced FY14) and virtual CD (FY21) created formats (recorded webinars, workshops) not fully addressed by current policy.
  - B. Publication rates of final TA reports remain very low:
    - Over the last three years, the Fund published only an average of about 7 percent, or around 62 out of the 964 TA reports annually uploaded in the Institutional Repository (IR).
    - Comparative publication rates:
      - Staff reports for Article IV consultations or the use of Fund resources (UFR): around 96 percent.
      - Financial Sector Stability Assessment reports: around 90 percent.
      - Technical notes: around 50 percent.
    - Approximately 15 percent of published TA reports are non-English and must be translated before circulation to the Board.
  - C. Corrections and deletions process is cumbersome:
    - Two-step review by CD recipient; post-transmittal corrections/deletions requested in practice in around 10 percent of reports where recipient consents to publish.
    - Corrections permitted for (i) data or typographical errors; (ii) factual mistakes; (iii) mischaracterization of views.
    - Deletions may be proposed for (i) highly-market sensitive information; (ii) policy intentions whose premature disclosure would seriously undermine implementation.
  - D. Delays and gaps in dissemination:
    - In 2020, around 80 percent of reports stored in EDMS were uploaded to the IR.
    - Timeliness lags:
      - Average of over three months from end of mission to finalization and transmittal to CD recipient.
      - A further six months on average to submit to the IR.
      - Reports are posted on KE country pages and shared with Executive Directors and financing partners, on average, nine months after the end of a mission.
    - Current policy provides a 60-day lapse-of-time consent when sharing final TA reports with Executive Directors, financing partners, and other parties with legitimate interest, which contributes to delays.
  - E. Lack of clarity over other CD information types:
    - RBM (Results Based Management) data, Common Evaluation Framework evaluations, and CDMAP administrative/operational data create new categories needing clear dissemination rules.
    - Evaluations: IMF02-funded evaluations shared with funding partners but not Executive Directors; IMF02 RTAC evaluations public via RTAC websites; IMF01 internal evaluations not publicly available.
    - RBM Governance Framework requires recipient consent for country-level RBM dissemination beyond staff (60-day lapse-of-time to Executive Directors/funding partners; explicit public consent).
    - Administrative information generally not considered sensitive unless the recipient requests otherwise; current policy lacks guidance about raw administrative data sharing via internal systems such as CDMAP.

### PLANNED POLICY REFORMS — implementation focus areas and rules
- A. Expanding scope: final CD output
  - Introduce “final CD output” to replace “final TA advice,” capturing all shareable CD outputs (TA and training), including written or recorded outputs delivered in final form to CD recipient(s): final TA reports, models, tools, webinars, training videos, presentations, recorded events, and notes.
  - Final CD output presumed to contain sensitive, non-public information and therefore requires CD recipient and authoring department consent prior to dissemination/publication.
  - Authoring departments determine whether training outputs are final; some training aides may require instructor context to be considered final output.
  - Dissemination of final training outputs would normally occur via the Fund’s website.
- B. Raising publication rates of final CD output (high-level summaries)
  - Policy emphasizes publication of high-level summaries of strategic final CD output rather than routine publication of full technical outputs.
  - Context:
    - On average, close to 1,000 TA reports are produced every year, compared with fewer than 200 Article IV or UFR reports.
    - Strategic final CD output = broad recommendations or diagnostics aimed at significant reforms (examples: diagnostic of the tax system; reports on legal framework for deposit insurance and bank resolution; macroprudential toolkit; rebasing GDP).
  - Requirements for high-level summaries:
    - For all strategic final CD output, staff should prepare a high-level summary including broad objectives, findings, and recommendations; for training, summarize objectives and any good practices/recommendations.
    - Summaries should have sufficient context to mitigate risk of misunderstanding; for TA reports, summaries would normally reproduce executive summaries from the full output to minimize extra work.
  - Consent process for summaries:
    - CD recipient’s consent to publish a summary requested on a lapse-of-time basis with 20 business days from transmittal of the summary and final output.
    - CD recipient will have an opportunity to review a draft of the summary before final transmission; authoring department will inform recipients of this policy at project start and when sending the draft.
  - Full final CD output may be published only with the CD recipient’s explicit consent; authoring department approval continues to be required.
  - Authoring departments may decline to produce/publish summaries if outputs are classified Confidential or Strictly Confidential under GAO 35, rev. 2.
- C. Limiting post-transmittal modifications
  - No post-transmittal modifications of final CD output, including high-level summaries, permitted except for corrections of remaining typographical errors which staff can make following departmental internal processes without a memo to management.
  - Deletions of market-sensitive information will not be permitted post-transmittal; reports containing such information are expected not to be published.
- D. Timeliness, coverage, and internal sharing (Fund-wide norms)
  - Indicative norms:
    - All final CD output, including high-level summaries, expected to be transmitted to the CD recipient within 30 business days from the last day of the activity.
      - Note: some activities (e.g., diagnostics) end before overall CD project concludes; training is transmitted at time of training.
    - For written output, mark as final in EDMS (or its replacement).
    - If applicable, submit to the IR within three days from transmittal to the CD recipient.
    - Lapse-of-time consent for dissemination to financing partners, Executive Directors, and other parties reduced from 60 days to 20 business days from transmission of final output.
  - Default sharing:
    - Information received by Fund staff during CD delivery can be shared with other Fund staff in line with GAO classification policies unless explicitly requested by the CD recipient not to do so.
    - Where recipients request sharing among staff be limited, management can decide to share information with relevant area and functional departments if deemed critical for program or surveillance purposes.
    - Assumption: by requesting CD, recipients have provided irrevocable consent that information critical for program or surveillance purposes may be shared with relevant departments.
    - CD departments may not reach ex-ante understandings that non-public information will be withheld from other departments.
    - Sharing such information with the Executive Board continues to require explicit CD recipient consent.
- E. Clarifying dissemination of assessment and administrative information
  - Non-recipient or non-country-specific information:
    - When CD information is not recipient-specific, it may be disseminated and published without recipient consent; authoring departments retain discretion on channels.
  - Assessment information (new category):
    - Captures Fund’s assessments of CD provision (including evaluations): RBM data, evaluations (internally and donor-funded), project risk assessments, project assessment reports.
    - Country-specific assessment information is classified as Non-public:
      - Made available with CD recipient implicit consent and appropriate context to Executive Board and Direct Financing Partners.
      - Made available with CD recipient consent on a 20-business day lapse-of-time to Other Parties with Legitimate Interest.
      - Made available to the Public only with explicit CD recipient consent.
    - Assessment information not specific to a CD recipient or country does not require recipient consent.
  - Administrative information:
    - Will continue to be made available unless the CD recipient explicitly requests otherwise.
    - Revised policy explicitly covers administrative information in CDMAP (internal operational system); CDMAP data accessible only to licensed Fund staff.
    - Examples: project-level budgets, mission dates, project-level funding sources may be disseminated to Executive Directors or outside the Fund unless the CD recipient explicitly requested otherwise; staff should provide sufficient context when sharing.
  - Other categories:
    - “The fact and subject matter of CD” ordinarily made available to public, Executive Directors, and partners unless recipient requests otherwise.
    - “Information that forms the basis of final CD output” is considered non-public and requires explicit CD recipient consent to share outside the Fund (including information provided by third parties; explicit consent of third parties required prior to dissemination).

### ACCESS, BOARD CIRCULATION, AND INTERACTION WITH THE WORLD BANK
- Board and Executive Directors:
  - Requirement to circulate full final CD output (including high-level summaries) to the Executive Board in advance of publication removed; this eliminates translation requirement for Board circulation and can free staff resources.
  - Executive Directors’ access preserved:
    - All final CD output of the constituency—whether for publication or not—made available to the pertinent Executive Director as soon as transmitted to the CD recipient, unless the CD recipient objects.
    - Executive Director of the country will be notified before a final CD output is published.
    - Other Executive Directors have access to final output not classified Confidential or Strictly Confidential after lapse-of-time consent process (where the CD recipient does not object).
- Interaction with the World Bank:
  - Fund staff may share final CD output, including high-level summaries and assessment information, with World Bank staff upon request without obtaining CD recipient’s explicit consent; CD recipient can explicitly request that information not be shared with the Bank.
  - Fund staff may share information that forms the basis of final CD output with World Bank staff upon request with the CD recipient’s explicit consent, if the authoring department determines sharing is necessary.
  - Concordat on Bank-Fund collaboration presumes Fund members request CD with awareness that final CD output will be shared with Bank staff; Fund staff retain discretion on sharing.

### IMPLEMENTATION, COMMUNICATION, AND RESOURCING
- Communication to stakeholders:
  - CD recipients will receive a fact sheet covering dissemination policies and practices, including consent rights, protections, policy changes, and introduction of high-level summaries.
  - Policy and fact sheet shared at start of every CD project and mission (e.g., attached to positive response to a CD request); CD departments to remind recipients when transmitting final products.
  - Revised policy and fact sheet to be circulated to the Executive Board for information; financing partners receive a fact sheet before funding agreements are finalized; other parties with legitimate interest receive a fact sheet when requesting CD information.
  - Revised policy and fact sheet will be posted on IMF.org.
- Resource implications and efficiencies:
  - Reforms will have resource implications but are expected to be partially offset by streamlining (focus on strategic output, limited summary length, reuse of TA executive summaries).
  - Additional efficiencies: streamlined post-transmittal modifications, reduced administrative requirements, eased consent requirements, shorter processing norms, forthcoming system improvements.
  - Departments expected to accommodate modest resource costs within existing envelopes.
- Implementation governance:
  - Operational Guidelines to be amended, circulated to the Board for information, and published.
  - Revised framework retains voluntary dissemination, two consent requirements (recipient and authoring department), and protection of non-public information.
  - Shareable training outputs and recorded formats require CD recipient consent (where relevant) and authoring department permission consistent with Copyright Policy.
  - Management may, in very limited circumstances, authorize sharing with staff information obtained during CD delivery even if recipient had requested limited staff dissemination; this policy should be disclosed at the start of each engagement.

### SELECTED KEY STATISTICS, NORMS, AND FIGURES (exact as in source)
- Annual production and publication:
  - Close to 1,000 TA reports produced every year.
  - 964 TA reports annually uploaded in the IR (basis for 3‑year average calculation).
  - Average published: about 7 percent, or around 62 reports annually.
- Comparative publication rates:
  - Article IV/UFR staff reports: around 96 percent.
  - Financial Sector Stability Assessment reports: around 90 percent.
  - Technical notes: around 50 percent.
  - Approximately 15 percent of published TA reports are non-English.
- Timeliness and process norms:
  - Current lapse-of-time consent: 60 days (to be reduced).
  - Proposed lapse-of-time consent: 20 business days from transmission of final output.
  - Proposed transmittal norm: within 30 business days from the last day of the activity.
  - Proposed IR submission norm: within three days from the transmittal to the CD recipient.
  - Typical observed lags in 2020:
    - Over three months from end of mission to finalize and transmit to recipient.
    - A further six months to be submitted to the IR.
    - Average nine months from end of mission to posting on KE country pages and sharing with Executive Directors and financing partners.
- Downloads figure (numerical values shown): 1065, 1073, 593, 581, 199, 291.

*Source: ppea2022001 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND*

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

### ppea2022001 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY — key points and proposed reforms
- The IMF’s capacity development (CD) information dissemination policy needs to adapt to a new landscape: the Fund is providing more CD and producing greater and more diverse types of CD-related information, while members, partners, and other CD providers increasingly expect greater transparency and access to information.
- The 2018 CD Strategy Review advocated wider dissemination of CD information while protecting staff candor and the role as trusted advisor.
- Benefits of wider dissemination cited:
  - Fostering stronger ownership.
  - Improving coordination internally and with other CD providers and financing partners.
  - Promoting accountability.
  - Advancing the Fund’s contribution to knowledge as a global public good.
- The 2018 Review found progress in dissemination but noted low publication rates of technical assistance (TA) reports and gaps in policy coverage.

- Specific envisaged reforms include:
  - Broadening the CD dissemination policy’s scope by creating a category of “final CD output,” expanding coverage to all CD information, including TA advice, training, and other forms of CD output.
  - Moving towards default publication of high-level summaries of strategic final CD outputs on a lapse-of-time basis with streamlined internal processes for producing such summaries.
  - Simplifying the publication process for final CD outputs by eliminating post-transmittal corrections and deletions.
  - Improving CD surveillance integration by enabling CD department staff to further share CD information relevant to program work or surveillance with staff in other departments.
  - Reducing delays in dissemination of final CD outputs to direct financing partners and Executive Directors by introducing Fund-wide norms and shortening the timeline for lapse-of-time consent.
  - Clarifying the policy on dissemination of Fund assessment (including evaluation) information to improve consistency in application.
  - Clarifying the policy on dissemination of CDMAP information beyond Fund staff, including to direct financing partners and Executive Directors.

- Date on document page: January 7, 2022.
- Approved by: Roger Nord and Rhoda Weeks-Brown.
- Prepared by: the Institute for Capacity Development (ICD) and Legal Department in consultation with other departments, under the guidance of Michaela Erbenova (ICD) and Bernhard Steinki (LEG).

### CONTEXT — rationale and principles
- The current dissemination policy framework was set out in the 2008 background paper and formalized in the 2009 Operational Guidelines, updated in 2013 and 2020.
- Key contextual observations:
  - The scale, scope, and nature of CD have evolved since 2008; the Fund is delivering more CD (Figure 1 references CD spending in millions of USD).
  - New delivery modalities and more diverse CD products have emerged.
  - External expectations for transparency and access to information from members, partners, and other CD providers have increased.
  - Executive Directors encouraged innovative approaches to raise awareness of the Fund’s CD work and more publication while preserving confidentiality and client trust.

- Core balance to preserve:
  - Maintain the Fund’s trusted advisor role and staff candor.
  - Introduce safeguards to protect non-public information.
  - Recognize resource implications of wider dissemination (staff time and translation needs).

- Consent framework and terminology changes:
  - The update clarifies which final CD outputs require consent for dissemination.
  - The paper replaces the general use of the term "confidential" (outside GAO classification) with either "non-public" or "sensitive" to characterize information that can only be made public on the basis of non-objection or explicit consent.
  - Consent requirements will continue to hold; dissemination remains voluntary for both recipient and authoring department, with ex-ante consent assumed in a limited number of circumstances.

- Management intends to amend the Operational Guidelines and circulate them to the Board for information and publication. Management’s authority over CD dissemination decisions generally extends to department heads under GAO 35, Rev. 2.

### ISSUES WITH THE CURRENT POLICY — identified shortcomings
- General progress to date:
  - The Fund has increased access to most TA reports for financing partners and the Executive Board, shared technical notes, manuals, and analytical tools, and launched public products (Policy Issue Notes, RCDC annual reports).
  - Disseminates CD knowledge via seminars, conferences, staff working papers, flagship documents, and Article IV consultation reports.

- Remaining challenges:
  - Gaps in coverage due to the evolution of CD in volume and delivery modalities.
  - Publication rates of TA reports remain low.
  - Rising burden on staff resources for disseminating and publishing CD information.
  - Need for additional clarity on dissemination of certain information categories.

- Specific issues detailed:
  - A. Some Types of CD Output are Not Covered
    - Training now accounts for 14 percent of all CD delivery and produces shareable output that funding partners may request for accountability purposes, other providers may find useful (subject to copyright rules), or the public may benefit from.
    - New modalities such as online training (introduced in FY14) and virtual CD (FY21) have created formats like recorded webinars and workshops that are not fully addressed by the current policy.
  - B. Publication Rates of Final TA Reports Remain Very Low (Figure 4 referenced).
  - C. Corrections and deletions rules warrant revisiting due to process burden.
  - D. Delays and Gaps in Dissemination of Final TA Reports (Figures 5–7 referenced; lags documented).
  - E. Lack of Clarity Over Other Types of CD Information (including CDMAP and Fund assessment/evaluation information).

### PLANNED POLICY REFORMS — implementation focus areas
- A. Expanding the Scope of the Policy
  - Create a “final CD output” category to capture all CD information including TA advice and training outputs (e.g., recorded webinars, online training materials).

- B. Raising Publication Rates of Final CD Output
  - Move toward default publication of high-level summaries of strategic final CD outputs on a lapse-of-time basis.
  - Streamline internal processes for producing summaries to raise publication rates.

- C. Limiting Post-Transmittal Modifications
  - Simplify publication process by eliminating post-transmittal corrections and deletions to reduce administrative burden.

- D. Increasing the Timeliness and Coverage of Dissemination
  - Introduce Fund-wide norms and shorten timelines for lapse-of-time consent to reduce delays for dissemination to direct financing partners and Executive Directors.
  - Enable CD department staff to share CD information relevant to program work or surveillance with other Fund departments to improve integration.

- E. Clarifying Policy for Existing CD Information Types
  - Clarify dissemination treatment for Fund assessment and evaluation information to improve consistency.
  - Clarify dissemination of CDMAP information beyond Fund staff, including to direct financing partners and Executive Directors.
  - Maintain interaction with other Fund dissemination policies (Transparency Policy, safeguards assessment policy, Transmittal Policy, Open Archives Policy, GAO 35 Rev. 2 handling).

### IMPLEMENTATION and governance notes
- The revised framework retains key principles of the current policy: voluntary dissemination, two consent requirements (CD recipient and authoring department), and protection of non-public information.
- Shareable outputs from training and recorded formats require consent of CD recipient(s) (where relevant) and permission of the authoring department, consistent with the Fund’s Copyright Policy.
- Ordinarily, information provided to CD departments can be shared with other Fund departments for program or surveillance purposes unless the recipient explicitly requests otherwise; going forward, management can determine that information critical to surveillance or program purposes can be shared even if the recipient asked that it not be shared. This policy should be disclosed at the start of each CD engagement.
- The Operational Guidelines will be amended, circulated to the Board for information, and published.

*Source: ppea2022001 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND*

### 8.      The current  policy no longer fully captures the wide array of shareable output. CD

### 8.      The current  policy no longer fully captures the wide array of shareable output. CD

### B. Publication Rates of Final TA Reports Remain Very Low
- Finding: Over the last three years, the Fund published only an average of about 7 percent, or around 62 out of the 964 TA reports annually uploaded in the Institutional Repository (IR).
- Comparative statistics:
  - Staff reports for Article IV consultations or the use of Fund resources (UFR) have a publication rate of around 96 percent.
  - Publication rates of Financial Sector Stability Assessment reports and technical notes are around 90 and 50 percent, respectively.
  - Approximately 15 percent of published TA reports are non-English and must be translated before circulation to the Board.
- Implication: Low publication rates of TA reports reduce the Fund’s ability to contribute to global public knowledge and to support coordination and synergies.
- Causes identified:
  - Consent requirements: Publication of final TA reports requires the explicit consent of the CD recipient(s) and approval of the head of the authoring CD department (in consultation with the relevant area department). Obtaining explicit (i.e., written) consent from the CD recipient has been challenging.
  - Sensitivity concerns: CD recipients may not wish to publish reports containing sensitive, non-public information or that highlight gaps in domestic frameworks or capacity.
  - Administrative burdens and resource intensity:
    - Current policy requires TA reports be circulated to the Executive Board for information in advance of publication, adding an extra step and requiring resubmission despite prior IR submission.
    - Translation requirements for non-English reports add resources and time.

### C. Revisiting the Corrections and Deletions Rules
- Finding: The final review process for TA reports prior to publication is unnecessarily cumbersome.
- Process described:
  - Two-step review by the TA recipient: (1) consultation on draft and solicitation of feedback prior to finalization; (2) after transmittal of the final report, the CD recipient can request further corrections and deletions for a narrow list of reasons.
  - Corrections and deletions are requested in practice in around 10 percent of reports where the CD recipient consents to publish.
  - After transmittal, any changes require departmental review and Fund management approval to ensure evenhanded application of criteria.
- Corrections permitted for: (i) data or typographical errors; (ii) factual mistakes; and (iii) mischaracterization of views.
- Deletions may be proposed if material is not public and qualifies as: (i) highly-market sensitive information; or (ii) policy intentions whose premature disclosure would seriously undermine implementation.

### D. Delays and Gaps in Dissemination of Final TA Reports
- Availability to internal stakeholders:
  - Majority of TA reports are available to staff, Executive Directors, and financing partners via digital applications (IR surfaces reports on KE country pages; Partners Connect for Executive Directors and partners).
  - In 2020, around 80 percent of the reports stored in the internal document system (EDMS) were uploaded to the IR.
- Gaps and causes:
  - Some RTAC reports may be in EDMS but not in the IR due to inconsistent practices across authoring departments.
  - Inefficiencies and gaps in document/repository systems require multiple separate submissions for a single TA report.
  - Limited guidance on sharing other types of final TA output (e.g., presentations, Aide Mémoires).
  - Under confidentiality principles, CD departments may not share information obtained in CD delivery with other Fund staff if the CD recipient explicitly requests limited dissemination, hindering integration with surveillance and lending.
- Timeliness:
  - In 2020, TA reports submitted to the IR took an average of over three months to be finalized and transmitted to the CD recipient from the end of mission, and a further six months to be submitted to the IR.
  - As a result, reports are posted on KE country pages and shared with Executive Directors and financing partners, on average nine months after the end of a mission.
  - Many departments have internal policies requiring reports be finalized and transmitted to the CD recipient around 6 to 7 weeks from the end of mission, but the three-month average lag suggests this is often not followed.
  - The current policy requires submission to the IR but does not set any expectation on timing, resulting in long lags.
  - The time needed to obtain CD recipient’s consent on a non-objection basis after finalizing the report also reduces timeliness; the current policy provides for CD recipient’s consent on a 60-day lapse-of-time basis when sharing final TA reports with Executive Directors, financing partners, and other parties with legitimate interest.

### E. Lack of Clarity Over Other Types of CD Information
- Expansion of information types due to systems and practices:
  - Introduction of Results Based Management (RBM) in 2013 created project-specific log frame data (country-specific ratings of outcomes, indicators, and milestones).
  - Approval of the Common Evaluation Framework in 2016 and its update in 2020 linked RBM information to evaluations.
  - CDMAP internal operational system introduced in 2021 linked administrative information with operational and financial data.
  - New, more broadly applicable products without CD-recipient-specific information have emerged.
- Assessment information (issues and practices):
  - Evaluations:
    - Considered “administrative information” under current policy (unless they contain final CD advice and CD recipients’ performance against the advice), and therefore generally could be freely disseminated and published.
    - In practice, IMF02-funded evaluations are shared with relevant funding partners but not Executive Directors.
    - IMF02-funded evaluations of RTACs are publicly available via RTAC websites, but evaluations of thematic funds or bilateral projects, and IMF01-funded internal evaluations, are not publicly available.
    - The Common Evaluation Framework requires CD recipient consent for sharing with Executive Directors and the public if the CD recipient’s country is mentioned in the main report (shared with funding partners; 60-day lapse-of-time for Executive Directors; explicit consent for the public). This policy applies only to evaluations that started after August 2020.
  - RBM:
    - RBM assessments are informal assessments produced by deliverers of CD and do not cleanly fit into an information category under current policy.
    - RBM Governance Framework requires CD recipient consent for dissemination of country-level RBM information beyond staff (60-day lapse-of-time for dissemination to Executive Directors and funding partners; explicit consent for the public).
  - Other CD delivery assessments:
    - Annual project assessments and similar products do not fit clearly under current policy; in practice, they are shared with financing partners but not with Executive Directors.
    - CDMAP is expected to make project assessment information more readily available internally.
- Administrative information:
  - Administrative information (project budgets, funding sources, personnel, funding program proposals) is generally not considered sensitive unless the CD recipient requests otherwise at the time of the CD request, and thus can be broadly disseminated and published.
  - Current policy lacks specific guidance about sharing raw administrative information directly through internal operating systems (e.g., CDMAP), which may be attached to operational information not shareable outside Fund staff (e.g., TIMS, FINPROD).
- Non-CD-recipient or non-country-specific information:
  - Current policy assumes CD-recipient-specific or country-specific information and focuses on recipient consent.
  - Generic CD information examples include policy issue notes (e.g., COVID-19), how-to-notes, non-CD recipient training materials, regional evaluations without country-specific information, and aggregated RBM data by region and workstream.
  - Clarity is needed on how generic forms of information should be treated as production of these products grows.

### Planned Policy Reforms
- Objective: Management intends to widen the scope of dissemination of information under the revised policy, while balancing staff and CD recipients’ concerns around candor, trust, and resources. Reforms were informed by internal deliberations, focus groups, and interdepartmental consultations.

A. Expanding the Scope of the Policy
- Reform highlights:
  - A new category, called final CD output, would replace the current category of “final TA advice” to bring training outputs under the policy.
  - The revised policy will be more granular regarding specific shareable outputs for both TA and training.
  - Definition: Final CD outputs would include any shareable (e.g., written or recorded) output of CD provided by Fund staff (whether TA or training) in the final form delivered to the CD recipient(s). This includes final forms of advice or recommendations found in final TA reports, models, tools, webinars, and training videos conveyed by Fund staff to the recipient(s) during TA or training delivery.
  - Formats/modalities: Final CD output could be provided via any modality and in any format, including TA reports, presentations, recorded events and notes.
  - Presumption: Final CD output is presumed to contain sensitive, non-public information and therefore requires the consent of CD recipients and staff prior to dissemination/publication.

- Training outputs:
  - The authoring department will determine whether shareable output (e.g., presentations, recorded events) is final.
  - Some training aides (slides, worksheets) may need accompanying (but often non-shareable) instructor context to be considered final output; authoring departments have discretion to determine which training outputs will be disseminated as final CD outputs.
  - Online training or recorded webinars, which combine training aides and instructor explanation, are examples of training output that authoring departments may consider final CD output and can therefore be disseminated.
  - Dissemination of final training outputs would normally occur via the Fund’s website.

B. Raising Publication Rates of Final CD Output
- (Text ends at introduction of this subsection in the provided content; planned reforms to raise publication rates are indicated but specific measures within this subsection are not included in the supplied excerpt.)

*Source: IMF — UPDATED FRAMEWORK ON THE DISSEMINATION OF CD INFORMATION (excerpt provided).*

### 25.      The reforms aim to increase publication rates, while taking into account resource

### 25.      The reforms aim to increase publication rates, while taking into account resource

### Publication approach and high-level summaries
- On average, close to 1,000 TA reports are produced every year, compared to fewer than 200 Article IV or UFR reports.
- Policy will emphasize publication of high-level summaries of strategic final CD output rather than routine publication of full technical outputs.
- Strategic final CD output: content reflecting broad recommendations from a CD project (including training), often diagnostic or aimed at significant reforms, as opposed to more specific, operational, and technical advice.
- Examples of strategic output: a diagnostic of the tax system; reports on strengthening the legal framework for deposit insurance and bank resolution; establishing a macroprudential policy toolkit; rebasing GDP.
- For all strategic final CD output, a high-level summary should be prepared by staff.
- Specific features of high-level summaries:
  - Include the broad objectives, findings, and recommendations of the CD.
  - For training, outline training objectives and, if applicable, any good practices, recommendations, and advice.
  - Be drafted with sufficient context to mitigate potential risk of content or advice being misunderstood or misconstrued.
  - For TA reports, summaries would normally reproduce executive summaries from the full output to minimize additional work.
- CD recipient’s consent to publish a summary will be requested on a lapse-of-time basis with 20 business days from the transmittal of the summary and final output.
  - CD recipient will have the opportunity to review a draft of the summary before final transmission; authoring department will inform recipients of this policy at the start of the project and when sending the draft.
- Full final CD output (e.g., TA report) may be published with the CD recipient’s explicit consent, as under current policy; authoring department approval continues to be required.
- Authoring department discretion: may decline to produce or publish high-level summaries if outputs are classified Confidential or Strictly Confidential in accordance with GAO 35, rev. 2.

### Rationale and expected effects
- High-level summaries address impediments to broader publication:
  - Do not reveal detailed technical analysis underpinning final recommendations; less likely to contain potentially sensitive information.
  - Less likely to impinge on the Fund’s candor and trusted advisor role.
  - Lapse-of-time consent facilitates more and timelier publication.
  - Focusing on strategic documents and training yields more extensive peer learning and dissemination of good practices while reducing resource implications.
  - Many TA reports already include executive summaries that could be repurposed.
  - High-level summaries may be more accessible to non-experts and the general public.
- Comparative downloads (Figure 8): policy issue notes (COVID-19, how-to-notes) and Article IV reports are downloaded in larger numbers than TA reports.

### Access, Board circulation, and administrative burden
- Updated policy removes requirement to circulate full final CD output, including high-level summaries, to the Executive Board in advance of publication.
  - This removes the need to translate non-English reports into English, freeing staff resources and facilitating greater publication in languages other than English.
- Executive Directors’ access preserved:
  - All final CD output of the constituency—whether for publication or not—would be made available to the pertinent Executive Director as soon as they are transmitted to the CD recipient, unless the CD recipient objects.
  - Executive Director of the country of the CD recipient will be notified before a final CD output is published.
  - Other Executive Directors would have access to final output not classified as Confidential or Strictly Confidential after the lapse-of-time consent process (where the CD recipient does not object).

### Limiting post-transmittal modifications
- No post-transmittal modifications of final CD output, including high-level summaries, would be permitted, except for corrections for remaining typographical errors which can be made by staff following each department’s internal process and without a memo to management.
- Deletions of market-sensitive information will not be permitted post-transmittal; reports containing such information are expected to no longer be published.
- The change reduces administrative burden but may result in fewer published full final CD outputs; it preserves recipient candor by keeping explicit consent for publishing full CD output while shifting expectations toward lapse-of-time publication of summaries.

### Timeliness, coverage, and internal sharing
- Key goals:
  - Reduce time between end of activity/mission and transmittal of final CD output to CD recipient.
  - Narrow gap between transmittal to CD recipient and submission to internal document systems, including the IR.
  - Support integration of CD with surveillance and lending.
- Management may, in very limited circumstances, authorize sharing with staff (with a strict need to know) information obtained by CD departments during CD delivery, even if the CD recipient explicitly requests sharing among staff be limited.
- Indicative Fund-wide norms:
  - All final CD output, including high-level summaries, are expected to be transmitted to the CD recipient within 30 business days from the last day of the activity.
    - Note: some activities (e.g., diagnostics) will take place and end before overall CD project concludes; training is transmitted at the time the training is conducted.
  - For written output, mark as final in the internal document system (EDMS, or its replacement).
  - If applicable, submit to the IR within three days from the transmittal to the CD recipient.
- Lapse-of-time consent for dissemination to financing partners, Executive Directors, and other parties with legitimate interest reduced from 60 days to 20 business days from transmission of the final output.
- Default sharing position: information received by Fund staff in the course of CD delivery can be shared with other Fund staff in line with GAO classification policies, unless explicitly requested by the CD recipient not to do so.
  - Where CD recipients request sharing among staff be limited, management can decide to share information with relevant area and functional departments if deemed critical for program or surveillance purposes.
  - Assumption: by requesting CD, recipients have provided irrevocable consent that information considered critical for program or surveillance purposes by Fund management may be shared with relevant departments.
  - CD departments may not reach ex-ante understandings that non-public information will be withheld from other departments.
  - Such information should be classified appropriately according to GAO 35 rev. 2.
- Sharing such information with the Executive Board continues to require explicit consent from the CD recipient.

### Clarifying dissemination categories: non-recipient, assessment, and administrative information
- Non-recipient- or non-country-specific information:
  - Any CD information type can include content not specific to a CD recipient or country (e.g., RBM ratings aggregated by region).
  - Given CD recipients are not identifiable, staff sees no reason why such information could not be disseminated and published.
  - Authoring departments retain discretion on dissemination channels.
- Assessment information (new category):
  - Captures the Fund’s assessments of CD provision (including evaluations).
  - Includes information produced by Fund staff or contractors related to performance, results, and progress of delivery during planning and management of CD: RBM data, internally and externally (e.g., donor) funded evaluations, project risk assessments, project assessment reports.
  - Country-specific assessment information is considered non-public:
    - Can be made available to direct financing partners and Executive Directors.
    - CD recipients should be informed of this policy at the start of each engagement and are presumed to have consented to dissemination of assessment information to direct financing partners and Executive Directors.
    - Dissemination to other parties with legitimate interest requires the CD recipient’s consent, requested on a lapse-of-time basis.
    - Dissemination to the public requires explicit consent.
  - Assessment information not specific to a CD recipient or country does not require recipient consent (see non-recipient rules).
- Administrative information:
  - Will continue to be made available unless a CD recipient explicitly requests otherwise.
  - Revised policy explicitly covers administrative information in the CDMAP system.
  - CDMAP is an internal operational system; information captured therein (including administrative information related to CD projects) can only be accessed directly by licensed Fund staff.
  - Administrative information (e.g., project-level budgets, mission dates, project-level funding sources) may be disseminated to Executive Directors or outside the Fund unless the CD recipient has explicitly requested that such information not be shared.
  - Staff expected to provide sufficient context when sharing administrative information to support proper interpretation.
- Other categories unchanged:
  - “The fact and subject matter of CD”: the fact of provision of Fund CD in response to a particular request and the general subject matter is not considered non-public unless the CD recipient requests otherwise; ordinarily made available to the public, Executive Directors, and other providers and financing partners upon request.
  - “Information that forms the basis of final CD output”: considered non-public and requires explicit consent by the CD recipient to be shared. Applies to both (a) information provided by the CD recipient or third parties in the context of CD provision; and (b) information generated by Fund staff in the course of CD before the CD output is finalized.
    - Such information can only be shared outside the Fund where sharing is necessary to facilitate coordination with financing partners and other providers and exploit synergies.
    - Where information has been received from a third party, the explicit consent of such party will also be required prior to dissemination.

### Interaction with the World Bank
- Policy largely unchanged:
  - Fund staff may share final CD output, including high-level summaries, with World Bank staff upon request without obtaining CD recipient’s explicit consent.
    - As part of the Concordat on Bank-Fund collaboration, Fund members are placed on notice that final CD output will be shared with Bank staff and are presumed to have consented; CD recipient can explicitly request that information not be shared with the Bank.
    - Fund staff retain discretion as to whether any final CD output should be shared with Bank staff.
  - The World Bank will treat information in the same way the Fund treats the information, taking practical steps to safeguard its confidentiality.
  - Fund staff may share information that forms the basis of final CD output with World Bank staff upon request, with the CD recipient’s explicit consent, if the authoring department determines sharing is necessary to facilitate coordination and exploit synergies.

### Figure 8 (downloads of Fund documents)
- The materials note that policy issue notes (COVID-19, how-to-notes) and Article IV reports are downloaded in larger numbers than TA reports.
- Numerical values shown in the downloads figure: 1065, 1073, 593, 581, 199, 291.

*Source: IMF — UPDATED FRAMEWORK ON THE DISSEMINATION OF CD INFORMATION (excerpts).*

### 41.      On sharing new information types, such as assessment information, as well as joint

### ppea2022001 - 41.      On sharing new information types, such as assessment information, as well as joint

### Sharing new information types and joint products with the World Bank
- Fund staff may share assessment information with World Bank staff upon request without obtaining recipient’s explicit consent.
- CD recipient may explicitly request such information not be shared with the Bank.
- CD recipients will have an opportunity to explicitly withdraw consent at the start of an engagement (¶42, bullet 1).
- Information produced jointly with the World Bank can be disseminated based on the more stringent rules that apply if dissemination policies differ between the Fund and the Bank (or other partner institution).

### Implementation — communication to stakeholders (¶42)
- CD recipients will receive a fact sheet covering the Fund’s dissemination policies and practices, including:
  - CD recipients’ right to consent and how their information is protected,
  - changes in policy,
  - the introduction of the high-level summaries for strategic CD output.
- The policy and fact sheet will be shared at the start of every CD project and mission (e.g., attached to a positive response from the Fund to a CD request from the authorities).
- CD departments are expected to remind CD recipients of these policies whenever final products are transmitted to the CD recipient.
- The revised policy and fact sheet will be circulated to the Executive Board for information.
- Financing partners will receive a fact sheet related to the Fund’s dissemination policies and practices before funding agreements are finalized.
- Other parties with legitimate interest will receive a fact sheet related to the Fund’s dissemination policies and practices when requesting CD information.
- The revised policy and fact sheet will be posted on IMF.org.

### Resource implications and efficiencies (¶43)
- Proposed reforms will have some resource implications, which will partially be offset through streamlining.
- Increasing publication, even with shorter high-level summaries, will require additional resources.
- Measures to reduce workload include:
  - focusing on strategic output,
  - limiting the length of summaries,
  - leveraging TA report executive summaries when possible.
- Additional efficiencies expected to help balance resource costs:
  - streamlined post-transmittal modifications,
  - reduced administrative requirements,
  - eased consent requirements,
  - shorter processing norms,
  - forthcoming system improvements.
- Departments are expected to accommodate any modest resource costs within existing envelopes.

### Annex I — Dissemination policy by information type and non-Fund staff audience (key rules and access)
- Fact and subject matter of CD (¶39): May be made public, unless CD recipient requests otherwise. Available to Executive Board, Direct Financing Partners, Other Parties with Legitimate Interest, and Public.
- Administrative information (e.g., CD project budget, personnel engaged in CD delivery, final funding program proposals, etc.) (¶38): May be made public, unless CD recipient requests otherwise. Available to Executive Board, Direct Financing Partners, Other Parties with Legitimate Interest, and Public (with appropriate context when sharing for non-Executive Board audiences).
- Assessment of CD provision (e.g., country-specific RBM data, country-specific evaluations, CD project risk assessment, etc.) (¶36-37):
  - Classified as Non-public.
  - Made available with CD recipient implicit consent and appropriate context when sharing RBM to Executive Board and Direct Financing Partners.
  - Made available with CD recipient consent based on a 20-business day lapse-of-time and appropriate context when sharing RBM to Other Parties with Legitimate Interest.
  - Made available with explicit CD recipient consent and appropriate context when sharing RBM to Public.
- Information forming the basis of final CD advice (¶39): Classified as Non-public and made available with explicit CD recipient consent for Executive Board, Direct Financing Partners, Other Parties with Legitimate Interest, and Public.
- Final CD output — High-level summaries of strategic final CD output (¶26-27):
  - Classified as Non-public.
  - Made available with CD recipient consent based on a 20-business day lapse-of-time for Executive Board, Direct Financing Partners, Other Parties with Legitimate Interest, and Public.
- Final CD output — Other final CD output (e.g., full TA reports, CD recipient-specific final training materials, final aide-mémoires, draft legislation provided by TA missions) (¶23, 24, 26):
  - Classified as Non-public.
  - Made available with CD recipient consent based on a 20-business day lapse-of-time for Executive Board, Direct Financing Partners, and Other Parties with Legitimate Interest.
  - Made available with explicit CD recipient consent for Public.
- Non-CD recipient specific information (e.g., non-CD recipient specific training, Policy Issue Notes, etc.) (¶35): May be made public and is Available to Executive Board, Direct Financing Partners, Other Parties with Legitimate Interest, and Public.

- Note on World Bank access (footnote 1): Compared with other parties with legitimate interest, World Bank staff have greater access to Fund CD-related documents. The Concordat on Bank-Fund collaboration has been applied to permit Fund staff to share final CD output, including high-level summaries, and assessments of CD provision, with World Bank staff upon request without obtaining CD recipient’s explicit consent. Members request Fund CD with the full knowledge of these rules and are presumed to have implicitly consented to such disclosure.

*Source: ppea2022001 - 41. On sharing new information types, such as assessment information, as well as joint*

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/pp/2022/english/ppea2022001.pdf_