## ppea2025015

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [ppea2025015](https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/pp/2025/english/ppea2025015.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/files/publications/pp/2025/english/ppea2025015.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/files/publications/pp/2025/english/ppea2025015.pdf.json)

---

### Executive summary — context and overall budget framing
- Global economic context:
  - Global disinflation continuing, with significant remaining uncertainty.
  - Transformations in the economic landscape and shifting policy priorities driving strong demand for Fund engagement.
  - Spring GPA (forthcoming) sets medium-term directions for the Fund’s policy advice, lending, and capacity development.
- FY26–28 budget framework:
  - Ongoing budget discipline reinforced by a management-led streamlining exercise to rationalize internal processes and outputs and prioritize department-level activities.
  - Reallocation and savings at Fund-wide and departmental levels focus resources on evolving institutional priorities and member-facing activities.
  - The Fund’s budget is roughly the same in real terms as it was two decades ago.

### FY26 net administrative budget (NAB) and headline fiscal figures
- Proposed NAB: $1,551.7 million, nominal.
- Proposed FY26 NAB in FY25 dollars: $1,507.9 million (includes $7.4 million cyber-security top-up).
- General structural and temporary administrative resources—excluding OED and IEO—will decline $3.4 million in FY26 to $1,467.7 million in real terms (notwithstanding the proposed modest top-up).
- Gross administrative envelope (FY26, FY25 dollars): $1,937.0 million.
- Proposed FY26 capital budget: $132.5 million, nominal.
- Proposed externally funded budget: $288.2 million, nominal.
- FY26 gross administrative resourcing will increase by 0.6 percent (real terms); general NAB plus temporary resourcing declines in real terms by 0.2 percent (-$3.4 million).
- Memorandum: General NAB + Temp Envelope (FY26, real terms, excl OED/IEO): $1,467.7 million.

### Medium-term income and budget context (Section II — A)
- Income-budget dynamic:
  - FY26–28 budget consistent with a projected surplus in the medium-term income position and precautionary balances above the medium-term target of SDR FY25 billion.
  - Projected operational income remains above budget expenditures through the projection period.
- Key assumptions and adjustments affecting income:
  - Income projection reflects reforms to charges/surcharges effective since November 1, 2024.
  - Reimbursements to the GRA from the SDR department and the RST contribute to income; suspension of PRGT reimbursements through FY2031 agreed as part of the 2024 PRGT review.
  - Executive Board endorsed a GRA transfer of SDR 6.9 billion (about $9 billion) to the Interim Placement Administered Account (IPAA) from FY25 to FY29; the annual transfer impact is included in income projections.
- Figures and scope notes:
  - Figure 3: Net Administrative Budget and Carryforward, FY13-28 (Millions of FY25 US dollars). FY26-FY28 includes proposed cybersecurity/data privacy NAB top-up ($7.4 million).
  - Figure 4: Income and Expenses—FY08–30 (Billions of Nominal US Dollars). Excludes pension-related (IAS 19) gains/losses.
- Forthcoming analysis: Review of the Fund’s Income Position for FY25 and FY26 will provide further analysis of these assumptions.

### Sustained demand and lending pressures (Section II — B)
- Member demand:
  - Increased support sought across surveillance, lending and CD, including granular and tailored policy advice.
  - FY25 spending above expectations in some areas to develop analytical tools and meet membership demand; FY26 expects mainstreaming to reduce resource use.
- Lending scale and activity (through March 7, FY25):
  - Fifteen arrangements and one emergency operation approved, with 5 including an RSF component.
  - Financing commitment totaled $144 billion; $81 billion associated with disbursing UCT-arrangements.
  - Active requests could result in 14 additional UCT programs (9 envisaging an RSF component) and two emergency assistance operations in the remainder of FY25, implying an additional $9 billion in funding.
  - Currently 13 enquiries with a high likelihood of translating into FY26 requests: 12 potential UCT operations (4 with an RSF component) and one emergency operation.
  - Baseline scenario in the forthcoming Review suggests program activity will remain elevated in FY26.
- Work pressures and staff indicators:
  - Reported overtime declined from 2021 peak of 12.3 percent, though pockets of high overtime remain among senior staff.
  - Leave indicators returned to pre-pandemic levels.
  - 2024 Staff Engagement Survey highlights ongoing importance of reducing work pressures due to mental health concerns.

### Operating model, technology, and cyber/data privacy (Section II — C)
- Operating model challenges:
  - Modernizing and streamlining corporate structures to support core delivery.
  - Addressing legacy underinvestment in technology and business-process efficiency; strengthening risk and control functions.
  - Continued investment needed in cyber-security and data privacy; evaluating global footprint to better support engagement.
- Cybersecurity/data privacy administrative and capital plans:
  - FY25 funding for cyber/data privacy: $15.2 million (increase from about $10 million in FY21 via reprioritization and $2.2 million temporary emergency funding).
  - Proposed administrative top-up would cover about one-third of related administrative expenses and would mainly fund ITD and STA.
  - Top-up staffing and composition:
    - Top-up would provide funding for 8 staff and 1 contractual on cybersecurity, and 5 staff equivalents and 1 contractual on data privacy—mainly replacing FY25 temporarily funded positions.
  - Administrative resource timing: additional funding concentrated in FY26 (about 60 percent of the proposed million top-up).
  - Capital cyber-related projects to be met within the IT-intensive capital envelope.
  - In absence of administrative top-up, significant reductions in other IT and statistics-related activities would be required, implying delays in BTS initiatives and data systems improvements.

- Table 2 (selected numeric entries — Millions of FY25 US Dollars, capital and administrative):
  - Administrative Budget: FY25 15.2; FY26 17.0; FY27 18.3; FY28 20.0.
  - Cybersecurity Administrative: FY25 14.8; FY26 15.5; FY27 16.8; FY28 18.5.
  - Top-up (Cybersecurity): FY26 2.9; FY27 1.3; FY28 1.7; Total Top-up 5.9.
  - Data Privacy Administrative: FY25 0.4; FY26 1.5; FY27 1.5; FY28 1.5.
  - Total Structural Top-up (Cybersecurity + Data Privacy): FY26 4.4; FY27 1.3; FY28 1.7; FY26-28 total 7.4.
  - Capital Budget FY25 8.3; FY26 16.2; FY27 15.0; FY28 9.8; FY26-28 total 33.9.
  - Cyber Security Capital: FY25 6.7; FY26 13.2; FY27 15.0; FY28 9.8; FY26-28 total 30.9.
  - Cyber Security Direct Project (Total): FY25 3.9; FY26 9.8; FY27 11.3; FY28 3.9; FY26-28 total 25.0.
  - Cyber Security Total Cloud (Recurrent): FY25 2.8; FY26 3.4; FY27 3.7; FY28 5.9; Cumulative 5.9.
  - Data Privacy Capital: FY25 1.6; FY26 3.0; FY27 0.0; FY28 0.0; FY26-28 total 3.0.

### FY25 developments, achievements, and execution (Section III)
- FY25 achievements — key outputs:
  - Country Operations:
    - Financing to 50 countries (incl. 32 LICs).
    - 23 RSF operations approved, 14 in train.
    - 137 Article IV consultations, 9 FSAPs concluded.
    - 174 countries/territories received CD.
  - Multilateral Surveillance:
    - G20 reports and background notes; support for collective discussion.
  - Policy/Analytical:
    - New models including global dynamic network models; work on financial platforms, digital payments, BCP.
  - Fund Governance and Finance:
    - PRGT Review; Review of charges and the surcharge policy; Review of the access limits.
  - Internal Support:
    - BTS-related modernization including cybersecurity ramp-up, launch of AIDA, Copilot Chat, and LS Translate; facilities work; Overseas Staff Handbook; Career Hub; 2024 Pulse Survey.

- FY25 utilization and execution:
  - FY25 utilization of the general structural budget (excluding OED/IEO) projected to remain above 100 percent, reflecting significant temporary resourcing.
  - With OED/IEO, utilization expected to fall to 99.2 percent (100.0 percent in FY24).
  - Personnel main driver of execution above the structural budget.
  - Fund‑financed travel projected at 91 percent utilization in FY25 versus 97 percent in FY24; average ticket prices remain 41 percent above precrisis levels; mission volume declined by about 11 percent.
  - Externally financed travel utilization projected at 87 percent (75 percent in FY24).
  - FY25 Gross Admin Envelope is $1,925 million.

- Receipts (selected Table 4 figures, Millions of FY25 U.S. dollars):
  - Total receipts: FY24 Outturn 307.1; FY25 Proj. outturn 269.3; FY25 Proj. utilization 87.7; FY26 Proposed Budget 324.8; FY26 Proposed utilization 86.9.
  - Externally financed CD (direct cost): FY24 Outturn 260.8; FY25 Proj. outturn 227.8; FY26 Proposed Budget 275.9.
  - General receipts: FY24 Outturn 46.3; FY25 Proj. outturn 41.5; FY26 Proposed Budget 48.9.
  - Trust Fund Fees: FY24 Outturn 13.9; FY25 Proj. outturn 15.9; FY26 Proposed Budget 16.9.
  - Concordia: FY24 Outturn 4.3; FY25 Proj. outturn 3.5; FY26 Proposed Budget 4.3.
  - Proposed PRGT Inv Fee: Proposed FY26 value 2.3.

- Proposed FY26 receipt changes highlighted:
  - Temporary increase in externally funded CD limit (one-off factors).
  - Small increase in general receipts.
  - Reduced budgets for parking and Concordia revenue to align with actual experience.
  - FIN and LEG will propose a PRGT fee to recover increased administration costs of investments in the DIA and LTIA following recent reforms; forthcoming paper will detail this proposal.

### Spending by output and CD funding (Section 14 and Box 3)
- FY25 real direct spending projected increases:
  - Total increase projected at $24 million excluding travel ($28 million including), or 1.5 percent and 1.7 percent, respectively.
  - Bilateral and multilateral surveillance and CD have highest projected growth.
- CD spending key figures and composition:
  - Overall CD spending (including related corporate overheads) expected to increase by $3 million (0.5 percent) in FY25 to $548 million.
  - Ratio of overall Fund/external spending projected at 56/44 in FY25; or 39/61 for direct costs.
  - Direct spending (excluding Fund-wide overheads) expected to reach $398 million in FY25 (73 percent of total CD spending).
  - Externally financed CD projected to reach $241 million; Fund-financed direct spending $157 million.
  - Direct delivery represents about 46 percent of overall CD, with about 73 percent of this delivery externally funded.
  - Indirect costs of CD at $150 million represent about 27 percent of total CD costs and are generally Fund financed.

- CD delivery by workstream (selected numeric values from source charts):
  - Domestic Revenue Mobilization, 19.9
  - Monetary-Fiscal Policies, 2.8
  - Public Financial Management and Expenditure Policy, 13.4
  - Monetary and Financial Systems, 21.5
  - Macroeconomic Frameworks, 19.4
  - Statistics, 11.3
  - Legal Frameworks, 5.0
  - Other, 6.7

- FY26 CD budget programming:
  - Overall envelope programmed by departments to increase by 0.8 percent in real terms year-on-year to $455 million in FY25 dollars.
  - Includes a $4.2 million (1.5 percent) one-off increase in external resources and a $0.7 million (-0.4 percent) decline in Fund-financed resources.
  - CD projected to remain about 1/3 of the Fund budget.

### FY26 administrative budget rebalancing, reprioritization, and carryforward
- Reprioritization and savings:
  - Departments identified about $76.8 million in structural savings/reprioritization (5 percent of the FY25 NAB) to fund shifts in activities within and between departments.
  - Examples: reallocation after completion of policy reviews, reduction in scale of some outputs, cost reduction initiatives, consolidation of field offices, scaled down travel and greater reliance on virtual engagement.
  - Management-led streamlining review underway; implementation to commence over FY26 and continue into medium term.
- Carryforward rules and limits:
  - FY26 proposes a general carryforward limit of 4 percent (versus 5 percent in FY25 and a high of 8 percent in FY22).
  - Carryforward table entries (Millions of FY25 US dollars):
    - Carryforward General (Excl. OED/IEO) 55.8; Allocated FY26 28.1; Reserve FY27/28 27.8; Overall FY26 (ceiling) 82.5; General FY25 (ceiling) 65.8.
- Budget by inputs (selected fiscal figures from Tables 5 and 8):
  - Gross Fund Financed FY25: 1,557.19; FY26 Proposal Total Fund-financed 1,602.39.
  - Net administrative budget FY25: 1,507.9; FY26 Proposal net administrative budget: 1,551.7.
  - Cyber-security related Top Up: 7.4 (structural).
  - Externally Financed FY25: 280.1; FY26 Proposal Externally Financed: 288.2.
  - Gross administrative envelope FY25: 1,837.29; FY26 Proposal gross administrative envelope: 1,890.59.
  - Capital FY25: 128.8; FY26 Proposal Capital: 132.5.
  - Memorandum item: General NAB + Temporary Envelope FY25: 1,402.96; FY26 Proposal: 1,443.66; change -3.4 (real).

### Departmental allocations, budget adjustments, and FTE changes (Section 18, Tables 9–11)
- Departmental structural resource movements (FY25→FY26, selected highlights):
  - Area departments: structural resources increase by $2.3 million in FY26; no area department will see a reduction in resourcing levels in FY26.
  - Non-CD functional departments: structural resources increase by $1.1 million in FY26; overall resources decline by 0.4 percent due to temporary unwinding.
  - CD departments: structural resources increase by $0.7 million in FY26; overall resources flat.
  - Corporate functions: structural resources increase by $2.4 million in FY26; overall resources decline 0.4 percent.
- Table 9 key row excerpts (Millions of FY25 US dollars — entries preserved as in source):
  - Area total structural/temporary/structural percent change: 388.9 120.0 401.9 1.90.3 11.8
  - AFR: 117.5 2.3 119.8 117.9 2.1 120.0 0.2 12.6
  - APD: 61.0 2.5 63.5 61.7 2.1 63.7 0.4 17.0
  - EUR: 81.4 2.8 84.2 81.4 2.8 84.2 0.0 1.6
  - MCD: 67.8 1.3 69.1 68.7 0.9 69.6 0.6 16.2
  - WHD: 61.2 3.1 64.3 61.5 3.0 64.5 0.3 15.4
  - Functional Non‑CD total: 224.0 7.7 231.7 225.1 5.6 230.7 -0.4 20.9
  - COM: 46.7 1.2 47.9 46.2 1.2 47.3 -1.2 6.0
  - FIN: 52.3 2.7 55.0 54.0 1.8 55.7 1.3 34.0
  - Functional CD total: 352.3 5.6 358.0 353.0 5.0 358.0 0.0 12.0
  - FAD: 78.6 3.0 81.6 78.3 3.0 81.2 -0.4 13.0
  - LEG: 40.0 1.5 41.5 40.9 1.3 42.2 1.7 26.8
  - Support total: 358.8 14.8 373.6 361.2 10.8 372.0 -0.4 6.6
  - ITD: 125.2 3.1 128.3 127.5 1.3 128.7 0.3 5.0
  - Total row: 1,500.5 59.7 1,560.3 1,516.0 63.7 1,579.7 1.2 8.4
  - Grand Total 2: 1,500.5 92.6 1,593.1 1,507.9 91.5 1,599.4 0.4 9.8

- Table 10 FTE changes (selected entries — preserve exact numeric entries):
  - Area total FY25 Budget: 849.6 Structural, 24.0 Temporary, Total 873.6. FY26 Proposed: 854.1 Structural, 20.5 Temporary, Total 874.6; FY25‑26 Percent Change Total 0.1; FY20‑26 Percent Change 9.5.
  - ITD FY25: 166.1 0.0 166.1; FY26: 172.0 0.0 172.0; FY25‑26 % change 3.6; FY20‑26 11.6.
  - Total FY25: 3,204.8 64.6 3,269.3; FY26: 3,229.5 47.5 3,277.0; FY25‑26 % change 0.2; FY20‑26 12.2.
  - Grand Total FY25: 3,330.8 64.6 3,395.3; FY26: 3,355.5 47.5 3,403.0; FY25‑26 % change 0.2; FY20‑26 13.0.
  - Externally financed: 126.0 - 126.0 both FY25 and FY26; FY25‑26 % change 0.0; FY20‑26 38.2.

### Business Technology Strategy (Box 5 — BTS Strategy)
- BTS scope and themes:
  - Period FY25-FY28; five main themes: renovating core systems, embracing Artificial Intelligence, increasing cybersecurity resilience, rationalizing the Fund’s technology backbone, and building a fit-for-purpose IT workforce.
  - IT-intensive investments guided by BTS; HQ1 lifecycle investments wind down as HQ2 Refresh ramps up (sequenced through FY36).
- Cyber Security Strategy objectives and spending:
  - Emphasizes invest in identify, protect, detect, governance, response, and recovery capabilities.
  - Projected spending:
    - Cybersecurity/data privacy spending of $8 million in FY25.
    - Additional $25 million proposed over the medium term in direct costs.
    - $6 million in recurring cloud costs by FY28.
  - Strategy aims include implementing an e-GRC system, enhanced education for privileged users, fast-tracking zero-trust, broadening security monitoring for multi-cloud, re-establishing cyber threat intel, and testing incident/response plans.
- AI investment and costs:
  - Initial GenAI steps: guidance on secure usage, GenAI governance committee, secure AI Digital Assistant.
  - Over next four years, eight AI capital projects across three AI domains are planned.
  - Planned spending:
    - About $14 million of direct AI capital spending over the medium term.
    - Cloud-related costs projected at $4 million by FY28.
  - Anticipated industry benchmark efficiency gain: average efficiency gains of 30 minutes per user per day.
- ERP modernization:
  - Current ERP: PeopleSoft; plan to move to a best-of-suite ERP landscape; initial work to modernize budget management, field office financials, travel, and address Workday-related experience challenges.
- Cloud and capital considerations:
  - Cloud costs (CCE) projected to increase to $25.0 million due to higher unit prices and retirement of on-premises systems.
  - Cyber/data privacy incorporated as a new major risk in the Enterprise Risk Self-Assessment for FY26-28.
- Risks and mitigations:
  - Capital and modernization risk rated moderate; concerns include project delays, cost overruns, growing cloud capital expenses, ERP replacement needs, AI landscape changes, and facilities investments.
  - Mitigations: strategic prioritization, monitoring through CBIT, long-term facilities planning, closer capital planning and execution oversight.

### Capital budgeting, cloud capital equivalent (CCE), and financing rules (Section 3)
- Capital budget rules and scope:
  - Capital budgets are available for three years, after which unspent appropriations lapse.
  - Projects in capital budget cover acquisition of building or IT equipment; construction, major renovation or repairs; major IT software development or infrastructure projects.
- Cloud Capital Equivalent (CCE):
  - CCE is a sub-category within the capital budget for cloud subscription costs; treatment approved by the Board in April 2021.
  - CCE introduced in response to migration to cloud-hosted platforms with subscription costs that shift spending from capital to administrative otherwise.
- Selected budgetary series (Millions of FY25 U.S. dollars, series as presented):
  - Total Gross Administrative Envelope (FY20–FY26 series as presented): 1,744; 1,640; 1,834; 1,685; 1,873; 1,727; 1,925; 1,770; 1,937.
  - Buildings, IT and Other totals (series): 281; 273; 274; 261; 264; 248; 270; 252; 272.
  - Information technology (row values): 88; 81; 79; 77; 71; 73; 76; 72; 76.
  - Receipts totals (series as presented): 290; 242; 281; 168; 293; 253; 307; 269; 325; 282; 329.

- Capital budget flows excerpt (FY20–FY26 nominal capital budget — presented in source table format; entries preserved as in source).

### Risks and risk management
- Budget-related risks identified:
  - Potential for further increases in demand for Fund lending (from already high levels).
  - Impact of sustained high work pressures.
  - Pricing pressures and CD donor funding volatility.
  - Technology and process-related vulnerabilities, and IT-intensive capital project implementation risks.
- Risk treatment:
  - Issues captured within the enterprise risk framework; specified mitigation taken into account in resourcing and residual risks monitored on an ongoing basis.
  - Cyber/data privacy assessed as a major risk requiring ongoing investment and monitoring.

### Implementation timing and next steps
- Implementation of streamlining review measures expected to commence over FY26 and continue into the medium term; savings will accrue gradually.
- Staff will continue to engage the Board on progress through upcoming strategic and budget engagements; specific policy changes requiring Executive Board approval will be considered (e.g., CSR, FSAP review).

*Prepared by the Office of Budget and Planning; Executive summary dated March 28, 2025. Source — ppea2025015, FY2026–FY2028 MEDIUM-TERM BUDGET (selected sections).*

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

### Context
- The global economy has proven resilient in the post-pandemic period, with global disinflation continuing, but with significant remaining uncertainty.
- Transformations in the economic landscape and shifting policy priorities are driving strong demand for Fund engagement.
- The Spring GPA (forthcoming) sets out medium-term directions for the Fund to safeguard macroeconomic and financial stability, support policies to boost private-sector led growth, and promote cooperative solutions through policy advice, lending, and capacity development.

### FY26–28 budget framework
- Overall budget context reflects ongoing budget discipline, reinforced by a management-led streamlining exercise to rationalize internal processes and outputs and prioritize department-level activities.
- Reallocation and savings at Fund-wide and departmental levels focus resources on evolving institutional priorities and member-facing activities.
- The Fund’s budget is roughly the same in real terms as it was two decades ago.

### FY26 net administrative budget (NAB)
- Proposed NAB: $1,551.7 million, nominal.
- In FY25 dollars, proposed FY26 NAB totals $1,507.9 million, reflecting a proposed $7.4 million top-up (0.5 percent of the NAB) for cyber-security needs.
- General structural and temporary administrative resources—excluding OED and IEO—will decline $3.4 million in FY26 to $1,467.7 million in real terms, notwithstanding the proposed modest top-up for cyber-security.
- Decline drivers:
  - $10.0 million unwinding of exceptional pandemic-related temporary carryforward space in FY26.
  - A final $12.5 million real decline in carryforward is programmed for FY27.
- With general NAB execution rates above 100 percent, continued budget pressure requires sustained budget discipline and strong reprioritization.

### Gross budget and receipts
- FY26 gross administrative budget projected at $1,937.0 million in FY25 dollars, up $11.5 million.
- Gross budget increase driven by:
  - Temporary OED carryforward increase of $9.8 million.
  - $4.2 million increase in budgeted donor resourcing.
  - $0.3 million projected increase in general receipts.
- These increases are partially offset by the decline in general temporary resources.

### External funding
- Proposed externally funded budget: $288.2 million, nominal.
- Externally funded budget will increase slightly in real terms in FY26, reflecting one-off factors.
- Receipts largely CD-related (as noted in Table 1 summary).

### Capital budget
- Proposed FY26 capital budget: $132.5 million, nominal.
- Capital budget will support:
  - Large facilities replacement needs and field offices, with initial planning for a refresh of the HQ2 building.
  - IT-intensive investments under the Fund’s Business Technology Strategy, including ongoing modernization and legacy replacements.
  - Investment in AI and the Fund’s cyber-security posture.

### Sustainability
- The FY26–28 budget remains consistent with the Fund’s medium-term income position and precautionary balance target.

### Risks and risk management
- Budget-related risks include:
  - Potential for further increases in demand for Fund lending (from already high levels).
  - Impact of sustained high work pressures.
  - Pricing pressures.
  - CD donor funding volatility.
  - Technology and process-related vulnerabilities, and IT-intensive capital project implementation risks.
- These issues are captured within the enterprise risk framework, with specified mitigation taken into account in resourcing and with residual risks monitored on an ongoing basis.

### Budget changes and key metrics (summary from Table 1 and section highlights)
- Net Administrative Budget (FY25 dollars): proposed FY26 NAB = $1,507.9 million (includes $7.4 million cyber-security top-up).
- General NAB + Temp Envelope (memorandum): $1,467.7 million for FY26 (real terms, excl OED/IEO).
- Gross administrative envelope (FY26, FY25 dollars): $1,937.0 million.
- Capital envelope (FY26, FY25 dollars): 132.2 (in table as FY26 capital 132.2/132.5 nominal; the chapter notes proposed FY26 capital budget $132.5 million, nominal).
- Noted carryforward and temporary resource adjustments: carryforward limits and temporary carryforward unwinding affect FY26-FY27 resource availability.

*Prepared by the Office of Budget and Planning; Executive summary dated March 28, 2025.*

### 4. Paper structure. Section II sets out the medium-term budget context. Section III reviews

### ppea2025015 - 4. Paper structure. Section II sets out the medium-term budget context. Section III reviews

### SECTION II. MEDIUM-TERM CONTEXT — A. Income and Budget
- Income-budget dynamic: FY26–28 budget is consistent with a projected surplus in the medium-term income position and precautionary balances above the medium-term target of SDR FY25 billion.
- Projected operational income remains above budget expenditures through the projection period.
- Key assumptions and adjustments:
  - Income projection reflects reforms to charges/surcharges effective since November 1, 2024.
  - Reimbursements to the GRA from the SDR department and the RST contribute to income; suspension of PRGT reimbursements through FY2031 agreed as part of the 2024 PRGT review.
  - As part of the PRGT Review, the Executive Board endorsed a GRA transfer of SDR 6.9 billion (about $9 billion) to the Interim Placement Administered Account (IPAA) from FY25 to FY29; the annual transfer impact is included in income projections.
- Figures and scope notes:
  - Figure 3: Net Administrative Budget and Carryforward, FY13-28 (Millions of FY25 US dollars). FY26-FY28 includes proposed cybersecurity/data privacy NAB top-up ($7.4 million).
  - Figure 4: Income and Expenses—FY08–30 (Billions of Nominal US Dollars). Excludes pension-related (IAS 19) gains/losses. Lending projections based on actuals through Feb 2025 and country desk survey. From FY27, access for new prog. assumed at 60 percent of repurchases from end-Feb 2025 arrangements.
- Forthcoming analysis: Review of the Fund’s Income Position for FY25 and FY26 will provide further analysis of the assumptions underpinning income projections.

### SECTION II. MEDIUM-TERM CONTEXT — B. Sustained Demand
- Member demand and programmatic needs:
  - Members seek increased support across surveillance, lending and CD, including granular and tailored policy advice and continued engagement.
  - FY25 spending above expectations in some areas to develop analytical tools, complete diagnostics, and meet robust membership demand; FY26 expects these activities to be increasingly mainstreamed, reducing resource use in line with available resourcing.
- Lending scale and complexity:
  - Lending at historic highs in both number and volume of arrangements.
  - Through March 7, FY25 approvals: Fifteen arrangements and one emergency operation, with 5 including an RSF component.
  - Financing commitment totaled $144 billion as of March 7, of which $81 billion is associated with disbursing UCT-arrangements.
  - Active requests could result in 14 additional UCT programs (9 envisaging an RSF component) and two emergency assistance operations in the remainder of FY25, implying an additional $9 billion in funding.
  - Currently 13 enquiries with a high likelihood of translating into FY26 requests: 12 potential UCT operations (4 with an RSF component) and one emergency operation.
  - Example of dynamic: March 2024 projection included 12 UCT operations versus 29 total possible UCT operations now projected.
  - Baseline scenario in the Review of the Fund's Income Position for FY25 and FY26–2027 (forthcoming) suggests program activity will remain elevated in FY26.
- Work pressures:
  - Reported overtime has declined from its 2021 peak of 12.3 percent, though pockets of high overtime remain, particularly among senior staff.
  - Leave indicators have returned to pre-pandemic levels.
  - 2024 Staff Engagement Survey highlighted ongoing importance of reducing work pressures due to contribution to self-reported mental health concerns.
  - Continued reprioritization and management-led streamlining are key mitigation measures.
- Figures referenced:
  - Figure 5: Fund Financial Support FY08–25 — Number of Arrangements (through March 7, 2025).
  - Figure 6: UCT Credit Outstanding, 2008-2024 (Billions of US Dollars).

### SECTION II. MEDIUM-TERM CONTEXT — C. Operating Model
- Overview:
  - Fund is modernizing and streamlining corporate structures to support core delivery.
  - Challenges: supporting expanded staff in headquarters and field (Figures 8a-b), ensuring HR and operational policies are fit-for-purpose, addressing legacy underinvestment in technology and business-process efficiency, and strengthening risk and control functions.
  - Continued investment needed in cyber-security and data privacy; Fund is evaluating global footprint to better support engagement.
- Cybersecurity/Data privacy:
  - ITD and STA strategies to reinforce cyber security and data privacy supported by administrative and capital investments.
  - Proposed administrative top-up would cover about one-third of related administrative expenses, supplementing existing resources and reducing dependence on temporary funding for structural needs.
  - Administrative resource needs include direct staff costs, personnel, consultants and vendors; additional funding concentrated in FY26 (about 60 percent of the proposed million top-up).
  - FY25 funding for cyber/data privacy: $15.2 million (increase from about $10 million in FY21 via reprioritization and $2.2 million temporary emergency funding).
  - Top-up would provide funding for 8 staff and 1 contractual on cybersecurity, and 5 staff equivalents and 1 contractual on data privacy—mainly replacing FY25 temporarily funded positions; also supports some vendor-related needs.
  - Capital cyber-related projects to be met within the IT-intensive capital envelope (see Section V).
  - In absence of the administrative top-up, significant reductions in other IT and statistics-related activities would be required, implying delays in BTS initiatives (legacy systems, foundational AI capabilities, technology-supported tools for economic analysis), and delays in data systems and governance improvements.
- Global footprint:
  - Field positions increased by about 35 percent to 287 staff, 163 field-based LTXs, and 595 local staff at end-FY24 (about a quarter the size of HQ personnel).
  - Number of field offices: 121 at end-FY24 (from 99 in FY10), including 104 resident representative, regional, and other offices, and 17 RCDCs at end-FY24.
  - Increased field presence strengthens engagement but requires support for facilities, security, IT, and financial and HR management.
- Figures and table references:
  - Figure 7a-b: Work Pressures–Overtime and Leave Usage; 2024 Staff Engagement Survey indicators.
  - Figure 8a-b: Fund Staff by Funding Source; Personnel Scale and Structure (Headcount). Data as of February 2025.
  - Table 2. Cybersecurity/Data Privacy FY25-28 (Millions of FY25 US Dollars) — administrative and capital budget breakdowns and staffing implications; key numbers include:
    - Administrative Budget: FY25 15.2; FY26 17.0; FY27 18.3; FY28 20.0; Cumulative 20.0.
    - Cybersecurity Administrative: FY25 14.8; FY26 15.5; FY27 16.8; FY28 18.5; Cumulative 18.5.
    - Structural Budget (Cybersecurity): FY25 12.6; FY26 12.6; FY27 15.5; FY28 16.8; Cumulative 18.5.
    - Top-up (Cybersecurity): FY26 2.9; FY27 1.3; FY28 1.7; Total Top-up 5.9.
    - Staffing (Temporary) FY25 2.2; Staffing (Structural) FY26 2.2; Staffing (Structural) cumulative 2.2.
    - Data Privacy Administrative: FY25 0.4; FY26 1.5; FY27 1.5; FY28 1.5; Cumulative 1.5.
    - Total Structural Top-up (Cybersecurity + Data Privacy): FY26 4.4; FY27 1.3; FY28 1.7; FY26-28 total 7.4.
    - Capital Budget FY25 8.3; FY26 16.2; FY27 15.0; FY28 9.8; FY26-28 total 33.9.
    - Cyber Security Capital: FY25 6.7; FY26 13.2; FY27 15.0; FY28 9.8; FY26-28 total 30.9.
    - Cyber Security Direct Project (Total): FY25 3.9; FY26 9.8; FY27 11.3; FY28 3.9; FY26-28 total 25.0.
    - Cyber Security Total Cloud (Recurrent): FY25 2.8; FY26 3.4; FY27 3.7; FY28 5.9; Cumulative 5.9.
    - Data Privacy Capital: FY25 1.6; FY26 3.0; FY27 0.0; FY28 0.0; FY26-28 total 3.0.
- Note: Table 2 sources: ITD, OBP, and STA. Footnotes clarify treatment of temporary FY25 staffing and capital project cost classifications.

### SECTION III. FY25 DEVELOPMENTS — FY25 Achievements and Execution
- FY25 Achievements (Box 2) — summary of key outputs:
  - Country Operations:
    - Financing to 50 countries (incl. 32 LICs).
    - 23 RSF operations approved, 14 in train.
    - 137 Article IV consultations, 9 FSAPs concluded.
    - 174 countries/territories received CD.
  - Multilateral Surveillance:
    - G20 reports and background notes; supporting collective discussion of key developments.
  - Policy/Analytical:
    - Analytical work on a range of traditional and emerging priority topics.
    - New models, including global dynamic network models.
    - Work on financial platforms, digital payments, BCP.
  - Fund Governance and Finance:
    - PRGT Review; Review of charges and the surcharge policy; Review of the access limits.
  - Internal Support:
    - BTS-related modernization including cybersecurity ramp-up, launch of AIDA, Copilot Chat, and LS Translate.
    - Facilities work on new office standards and support for field offices.
    - Overseas Staff Handbook; Career Hub; 2024 Pulse Survey.
- Utilization by input category (Table 3):
  - FY25 utilization of the general structural budget (excluding OED/IEO) is projected to remain above 100 percent, reflecting significant temporary resourcing.
  - With OED/IEO, utilization is expected to fall to 99.2 percent (100.0 percent in FY24), reflecting the FY25 increase in OED budgets.
  - Personnel is the main driver of execution above the structural budget. Utilization above structural budget projected to decline slightly relative to FY24 due to reduced allocation of positions funded with temporary resources.
- Vacancy and travel dynamics:
  - Overall vacancies increased at start of fiscal year with new positions authorized; full-year vacancies projected to be negative in economic departments and overall due to some pre-hiring.
  - Fund-financed travel projected at 91 percent utilization in FY25 versus 97 percent in FY24.
    - Average ticket prices remain 41 percent above precrisis levels.
    - Per diem costs have declined (exchange rate movements); mission volume declined by about 11 percent.
  - Externally financed travel utilization projected at 87 percent (75 percent in FY24).
- Buildings, IT, and other expenditures:
  - Fund-financed spending in these areas similar to last year.
  - Lower-than-budgeted spending in facilities and printing/subscriptions partially offset by increased execution for other vendor services, hybrid meetings support, and Annual Meetings support.
  - Security spending broadly unchanged from last year.
- Receipts (Table 4 and narrative):
  - Receipts projected to increase in FY25, driven mainly by external funding.
  - External receipts in FY25 driven by a slightly higher limit; utilization projected broadly unchanged from last year at 87 percent.
  - General receipts projected to remain similar to last year despite a slight increase in budget; composition shifts expected (higher Trust Fees offset by shortfalls in parking fees and the Concordia).
  - FY25 Gross Admin Envelope is $1,925 million. Utilization of net budget above 100 percent reflects inclusion of all spending (structural and temporary) relative to the structural budget.
  - Table 4 key figures (Millions of FY25 U.S. dollars):
    - Total receipts: FY24 Outturn 307.1; FY25 Proj. outturn 269.3; FY25 Proj. utilization 87.7; FY26 Proposed Budget 324.8; FY26 Proposed utilization 86.9; Change FY25-26 4.5 (units).
    - Externally financed CD (direct cost): FY24 Outturn 260.8; FY25 Proj. outturn 227.8; FY25 Proj. utilization 87.4; FY26 Proposed Budget 275.9; FY26 Proposed utilization 87.3; Change FY25-26 4.2.
    - General receipts: FY24 Outturn 46.3; FY25 Proj. outturn 41.5; FY25 Proj. utilization 89.6; FY26 Proposed Budget 48.9; FY26 Proposed utilization 84.5; Change FY25-26 0.3.
    - Trust Fund Fees: FY24 Outturn 13.9; FY25 Proj. outturn 15.9; FY25 Proj. utilization 114.5; FY26 Proposed Budget 16.9; FY26 Proposed utilization 99.9; Change FY25-26 0.2.
    - Concordia: FY24 Outturn 4.3; FY25 Proj. outturn 3.5; FY25 Proj. utilization 82.9; FY26 Proposed Budget 4.3; FY26 Proposed utilization 80.1; Change FY25-26 -1.0.
    - Proposed PRGT Inv Fee: FY26 Proposed Budget 0.0 in FY24 and FY25; FY26 Proposed Budget 0.0; Proposed FY26 value 2.3; Change FY25-26 2.3.
  - Proposed FY26 receipt changes highlighted:
    - Temporary increase in externally funded CD limit (one-off factors).
    - Small increase in general receipts.
    - Reduced budgets for parking and Concordia revenue to align with actual experience.
    - FIN and LEG will propose a PRGT fee to recover increased administration costs of investments in the DIA and LTIA following recent reforms; a forthcoming paper will detail this proposal.

*Italic: Source — ppea2025015, FY2026–FY2028 MEDIUM-TERM BUDGET (selected sections: Paper structure; SECTION II. MEDIUM-TERM CONTEXT; SECTION III. FY25 DEVELOPMENTS).*

### 14. Spending by Output. Change data for real spending by output area is provided with and

### 14. Spending by Output. Change data for real spending by output area is provided with and

### Overview
- FY25 real direct spending is projected to increase for most output areas, with the total increase projected at $24 million excluding travel ($28 million including), or 1.5 percent and 1.7 percent, respectively.
- Bilateral and multilateral surveillance and CD have the highest projected growth.
- Travel changes derive mainly from externally funded activities, with Fund-financed travel projected to be down slightly.

### Direct country engagement (country operations and CD)
- Spending on direct country operations expected to grow, driven by increased work on surveillance and CD direct delivery (with work on lending already elevated).
- Modest growth in overall CD direct delivery driven by externally funded operations, roughly matched by reduced Fund-financed CD direct delivery (reversing increases during FY24 but remaining significantly above levels prior to the recent augmentation).
- Change in Fund-financed CD in FY25 is driven by FAD, MCM and STA, with FAD and MCM seeing increases in IMF02 spending levels.

### FY25 projected spending by outputs (summary points from Box 3)
- Overall CD spending, including related corporate overheads, is expected to increase by $3 million (0.5 percent) in FY25 to $548 million.
- The ratio of overall Fund/external spending is projected at 56/44 in FY25; or 39/61 for direct costs (travel, analytics, and management and administration, excluding Fund-wide overheads).
- FY26 budget: the overall envelope is programmed by departments to increase by 0.8 percent in real terms year-on-year to $455 million in FY25 dollars. This includes a $4.2 million (1.5 percent) one-off increase in external resources and a $0.7 million (-0.4 percent) decline in Fund-financed resources.
- CD spending projected to remain about 1/3 of the Fund budget.

- Direct spending (excluding Fund-wide overheads):
  - Expected to reach $398 million in FY25 (73 percent of total CD spending).
  - Externally financed CD projected to reach $241 million.
  - Fund-financed direct spending $157 million.
  - Fund-financed utilization has declined while externally financed utilization remains the same as FY24.

- Composition and funding shares:
  - Direct delivery represents about 46 percent of overall CD, with about 73 percent of this delivery externally funded.
  - Analytics/tool development represents 6 percent of total and management/administration 19 percent; these are more heavily Fund-resourced (57 percent and 66 percent, respectively).
  - Indirect costs of CD at $150 million represent about 27 percent of total CD costs and are generally Fund financed.

- CD utilization and shares (FY24 versus FY25p):
  - Utilization: Total 93 89; Fund Financed 102 92; Externally Financed 87 87.
  - Shares (FF/EF) Overall 59/41 56/44; Direct 43/57 39/61.

### CD spending by inputs and workstreams
- Personnel costs remained the largest component of direct CD spending (about ¾ of the total).
- Fund-financed CD activities are mainly conducted by staff; externally financed personnel are mainly short-term and long-term experts and contractual staff.
- CD delivery will continue to focus on public finances, monetary policy and financial system, statistics, macro-frameworks and legal frameworks, with public finance and legal frameworks expected to increase their shares in total CD.
- Delivery by workstream (selected values shown in source charts):
  - Domestic Revenue Mobilization, 19.9
  - Monetary-Fiscal Policies, 2.8
  - Public Financial Management and Expenditure Policy, 13.4
  - Monetary and Financial Systems, 21.5
  - Macroeconomic Frameworks, 19.4
  - Statistics, 11.3
  - Legal Frameworks, 5.0
  - Other, 6.7

- Distribution by delivery department (FY25 projected direct spending):
  - FAD and ICD continued to have the largest CD budgets; FAD has the largest share of total delivery.
- Distribution by region:
  - FY26 CD budget shares will increase in MCD and WHD relative to FY25 (increase in MCD supported by contributions from Saudi Arabia; increase in WHD involves an envisaged pilot training program).

### Multilateral surveillance, policy and governance
- Multilateral surveillance and global cooperation expected to grow, albeit with lower travel than FY24; work includes development and operationalization of models (including new global dynamic network models), GSDR, Deputies-level Trade Dialogue, multilateral support for country work, governance and financing reform.
- Policy and analytical work projected to rise slightly; key FY25 initiatives include work on debt policy reforms, IPF implementation, implementation of the CD Strategy and strategic CD funding roadmap, medium-term strategic work, reviews of the charges and the surcharge policy, of access limits and of the PRGT.
- Fund governance and finance work projected to grow modestly from already heightened levels, with reduced travel relative to FY24; funding supported work on implementing the 16th General Review of Quotas, engagement on quota review, the replenishment of the PRGT, and the addition of the 25th Board chair.

### Externally financed spending
- Externally financed spending (mainly CD) is projected to increase by $13 million to about $241 million, with utilization of 87 percent ($35 million below the budget limit), mainly reflecting higher delivery and travel utilization.

---

### FY26 Administrative Budget — Overview and fiscal parameters
- The real net administrative budget is proposed to increase by 0.5 percent based on a top-up to support cyber-security related needs, albeit with the general NAB plus temporary resourcing declining in real terms by 0.2 percent (-$3.4 million).
- Overall real gross administrative resourcing will increase by 0.6 percent.
- The budget rebalances activities to increase direct country support; includes structural reduction for some functional departments and increased structural resourcing for area departments, with modest net resource impact due to needed reduction in temporary positions.
- The FY26 deflator will be 2.9 percent, based on actual average U.S. CPI for calendar year 2024, under the updated methodology established in Annex III of the FY24-26 Medium-Term Budget.
- Salary/Deflator dynamics: overall salary dynamics imply a net positive impact; positive differential will be added to the structural salary reserve. No space for HR competitiveness measures is created in FY26, consistent with CCBR agreements.

### Budget space and reprioritization (Table 6 and narrative)
- Top-up: a modest increase in structural resourcing from the proposed top-up would support targeted activities related to cybersecurity and data privacy, mainly funding ITD and STA, with small allocations for LEG and HRD.
- Other structural resources: proposed new investment fee linked to PRGT-related investment operations; FIN/LEG to provide additional details.
- Departments identified about $76.8 million in structural savings/reprioritization (5 percent of the FY25 NAB) to fund shifts in activities within and between departments.
- Reprioritization/savings examples: reallocation after completion of policy reviews, reduction in scale of some outputs (analytical projects, TA notes, blogs), cost reduction initiatives, consolidation of field offices, scaled down travel volumes and greater reliance on virtual engagement.
- Management-led streamlining review underway to consider further cross-cutting opportunities for savings; implementation expected to commence over FY26 and continue into medium term.

- General carryforward:
  - FY26 budget proposes a general carryforward limit of 4 percent (versus 5 percent in FY25 and a high of 8 percent in FY22).
  - Carryforward table highlights: Carryforward General (Excl. OED/IEO) 55.8; Allocated FY26 28.1; Reserve FY27/28 27.8; Overall FY26 (ceiling) 82.5; General FY25 (ceiling) 65.8.

### Budget by Output (high-level allocations and changes)
- Country operations ($891 million):
  - Budgets for bilateral surveillance and lending ($520 million) will increase overall with some rebalancing in favor of lending and reduced reliance on temporary resources.
  - Budgets for CD direct delivery ($368 million) projected to increase overall, driven by external resources.
- Policy and analytics budgets ($145 million) will decline modestly.
  - Policy work includes preparation for the 2026 Comprehensive Surveillance Review and the 2026 FSAP Review; Review of Program Design and Conditionality; Review of the Short-term Liquidity Line.
  - Analytical priorities include productivity (especially in EMDEs), IPF, debt and macro-fiscal issues, trade and financial integration, longer term transformation, payments and crypto assets, and work on fragile and conflict-affected and small states.
- Multilateral surveillance and global cooperation and standards ($187 million) will decline slightly; priorities include analysis of interconnections and spillovers, AML/CFT Program expansion, BPM and System of National Accounts support, update of the global debt database (GDD), historical fiscal variables database, and G20 guidance.
- Fund governance and finances ($227 million) will increase modestly; projects include quotas, Review of the Fund’s Precautionary Balances, and PRGT Review reform implementation.
- Corporate functions ($360 million) will decline modestly despite cybersecurity/data privacy allocations; FY26 allocations support HR modernization, technology capabilities, ERM framework application, Data Privacy Policy implementation, and Open Archive Policy reform.

### Budget by Input Category (summary of Table 8)
- Personnel (about 73 percent of the gross administrative envelope) will remain largely flat in real terms. A modest increase in the Fund-financed component—mostly due to cyber-security/data privacy allocations—will be partly offset by a decline in the externally financed component.
- Travel (about 8 percent of gross admin envelope) will increase, largely driven by increased externally financed provisions.
- Building, IT, and other services (about 14 percent) will increase marginally in real terms, driven by externally financed allocations, partially offset by modest declines in Fund-financed budget.
- Receipts (about 17 percent) will increase slightly in real terms, driven by a temporary increase in the external financing limit and related management fees; the general receipts budget is proposed to increase slightly.

- Selected fiscal figures (from Table 5 and Table 8):
  - Gross Fund Financed FY25: 1,557.19; FY26 Proposal Total Fund-financed 1,602.39.
  - Net administrative budget FY25: 1,507.9; FY26 Proposal net administrative budget: 1,551.7.
  - Cyber-security related Top Up: 7.4 (structural).
  - Externally Financed FY25: 280.1; FY26 Proposal Externally Financed: 288.2.
  - Gross administrative envelope FY25: 1,837.29; FY26 Proposal gross administrative envelope: 1,890.59.
  - Capital FY25: 128.8; FY26 Proposal Capital: 132.5.
  - Memorandum item: General NAB + Temporary Envelope FY25: 1,402.96; FY26 Proposal: 1,443.66; change -3.4 (real).

### Implementation timing and next steps
- Implementation of streamlining review measures expected to commence over FY26 and continue into the medium term; savings will accrue gradually.
- Staff will continue to engage the Board on progress through upcoming strategic and budget engagements; specific policy changes requiring Executive Board approval will be considered (e.g., in context of CSR, FSAP review).

*International Monetary Fund — FY2026-FY2028 Medium-Term Budget: Section 14 (Spending by Output) and Box 3 (CD Funding and Budget/Spending Evolution).*

### 18. Overview (Figure 15, Tables 9-10). This section presents a breakdown of the distribution of

### 18. Overview (Figure 15, Tables 9-10)

### Distribution of Fund‑financed resources and FY26 changes by department
- Overall changes reflect the negative net change in core departmental resources due to the unwinding of exceptional temporary resources, requiring difficult trade-offs.
- Interdepartmental changes reflect only a fraction of reallocation of activity, given significant intra-departmental reprioritization (Section III) and ongoing rebalancing of contributions to cross-departmental activities.
- Increases in some cases reflect targeted additional resourcing (e.g., top-up; changes in receipts).
- Rebalancing of existing structural resources across departments reflects factors including a focus on resourcing direct country work and consideration of base resources, changing needs, and pressure points.

### Area departments
- Structural resources will increase by $2.3 million in FY26.
- Overall resources also increase, notwithstanding the needed unwinding of temporary resources (0.3 percent and 11.8 percent relative to pre-crisis levels, 2020).
- No area department will see a reduction in resourcing levels in FY26.
- Department‑level highlights:
  - APD: net resources mainly to support overseas offices, with some internal rebalancing to strengthen managerial complements.
  - MCD: increase linked with increased complexity in operations, including lending, with structural funds balancing needed temporary unwinding.
  - AFR and WHD: more modest net changes linked to increased complexity.
  - EUR: budget will remain flat relative to FY24.

### Non‑CD functional departments
- Structural resources will increase by $1.1 million in FY26.
- Overall resources will decline by 0.4 percent due to temporary unwinding in FY26, moderating the overall increase since FY20 to 20.9 percent.
- Only FIN will see a net increase, with greater structural resourcing linked to increased volume and complexity of PRGT‑related investments and unwinding temporary space.
- RES and SPR see overall declines linked to temporary space unwinding, supported by mainstreaming of work on long‑term challenges.
- COM will see a reduction in structural positions, linked to consolidation of some activities and outputs.

### CD departments
- Structural resources will increase by $0.7 million in FY26.
- Overall resources will be flat, moderating slightly the overall increase since FY20 to 12.0 percent.
- FAD, ICD, and MCM will see a slight reduction in structural positions and dollar budgets, addressing changing needs through reprioritization.
- LEG will see increases linked to legal support for data privacy and PRGT‑related work.
- STA will also see increases linked to data privacy, data subscriptions and partnerships on statistical standards.

### Corporate functions
- Structural resources will increase by $2.4 million in FY26.
- Overall resources will decline 0.4 percent, moderating the net increase since FY20 to 6.6 percent.
- Department‑level highlights:
  - ITD: structural increase related to work on cyber risks; unwinding of significant temporary resources linked to cloud support services and licenses for on premise systems scheduled for decommissioning.
  - HRD: modest increase in structural resources, linked to support for data privacy work.
  - CSF: small decline reflecting efficiency gains enabling unwinding of temporary resources.
  - SEC: modest decline, mainly in temporary resources but also in structural budgets that had seen historic underutilization.
  - OIA, ORM and TRM: begin to unwind exceptional temporary resourcing linked to modernization assessment (OIA) and stand‑up activities (ORM and TRM).

### Overall departmental budgets and externally financed staff
- Externally financed budgets are concentrated in CD departments, with an important impact on the relative scale of resources.
- A total of 126 staff are also to be funded externally.

### Figure 15 (FY26 Change in Budget Allocations by Department versus FY25)
- Data source: OBP.
- Visual categorization shown in figure: ADs; CD FDs; Non‑CD FDs; Support; Small Offices; Existing Structural; Top up; Proposed PRGT fee; Temporary; Net Overall.
- FY20‑26 Net Overall (RHS) series included in the figure.

### Table 9: Fund‑Financed Budget Adjustments by Department, FY25‑26 (Millions of FY25 US dollars)
- Source: OBP.
- Key table excerpts (preserve exact numeric entries as presented in source):
  - Area total structural/temporary/structural percent change: 388.9 120.0 401.9 1.90.3 11.8
  - AFR row: 117.5 2.3 119.8 117.9 2.1 120.0 0.2 12.6
  - APD row: 61.0 2.5 63.5 61.7 2.1 63.7 0.4 17.0
  - EUR row: 81.4 2.8 84.2 81.4 2.8 84.2 0.0 1.6
  - MCD row: 67.8 1.3 69.1 68.7 0.9 69.6 0.6 16.2
  - WHD row: 61.2 3.1 64.3 61.5 3.0 64.5 0.3 15.4
  - Functional Non‑CD total: 224.0 7.7 231.7 225.1 5.6 230.7 -0.4 20.9
  - COM: 46.7 1.2 47.9 46.2 1.2 47.3 -1.2 6.0
  - FIN: 52.3 2.7 55.0 54.0 1.8 55.7 1.3 34.0
  - RES: 45.3 1.1 46.4 45.3 0.6 45.8 -1.3 16.4
  - SPR: 79.7 2.7 82.4 79.7 2.2 81.9 -0.7 25.4
  - Functional CD total: 352.3 5.6 358.0 353.0 5.0 358.0 0.0 12.0
  - FAD: 78.6 3.0 81.6 78.3 3.0 81.2 -0.4 13.0
  - ICD: 57.5 0.0 57.5 57.1 0.0 57.1 -0.5 3.2
  - LEG: 40.0 1.5 41.5 40.9 1.3 42.2 1.7 26.8
  - MCM: 111.3 0.1 111.3 110.9 0.1 111.0 -0.3 11.7
  - STA: 65.1 1.0 66.1 65.8 0.7 66.4 0.5 11.4
  - Support total: 358.8 14.8 373.6 361.2 10.8 372.0 -0.4 6.6
  - CSF: 127.0 1.1 128.1 127.0 0.8 127.8 -0.2 0.9
  - HRD: 50.4 6.3 56.7 50.6 6.3 56.9 0.4 10.9
  - ITD: 125.2 3.1 128.3 127.5 1.3 128.7 0.3 5.0
  - OBP: 6.7 0.6 7.3 6.7 0.6 7.3 0.0 23.4
  - OIA: 6.7 0.4 7.1 6.7 0.0 6.7 -6.2 11.3
  - ORM: 5.3 1.1 6.4 5.3 0.8 6.1 -4.4 66.2
  - SEC: 28.8 0.3 29.1 28.6 0.0 28.6 -1.8 4.1
  - TRM: 8.8 1.8 10.6 8.8 1.0 9.8 -7.3 91.4
  - Small Offices: 20.3 1.2 21.5 20.6 0.9 21.4 -0.4 20.8
  - Center: 37.3 1.5 38.8 46.1 4.0 50.1 ... ...
  - Other: 118.9 16.9 135.8 118.9 26.6 145.5 7.2 9.5
  - OED: 97.4 16.5 114.0 97.4 26.3 123.7 8.5 12.9
  - IEO: 7.6 0.4 8.0 7.6 0.4 8.0 0.1 -6.7
  - Central HR Programs: 13.8 -13.8 13.8 -13.8 0.0 -6.1
  - Total row: 1,500.5 59.7 1,560.3 1,516.0 63.7 1,579.7 1.2 8.4
  - Gross budget/reserve shift 1: ... 32.9 ... -8.1 27.8 19.7 ...
  - Grand Total 2: 1,500.5 92.6 1,593.1 1,507.9 91.5 1,599.4 0.4 9.8

(Note: table entries shown as in source; columns represent FY25 Budget, Structural, Temporary, FY26 Proposed Budget, Structural, Temporary, FY25‑26 Percent Change, FY20‑26 Percent Change.)

### Table 10: FTE Changes by Department, FY25‑26
- Source: OBP.
- Key FTE figures (preserve exact numeric entries as presented in source):
  - Area total FY25 Budget: 849.6 Structural, 24.0 Temporary, Total 873.6.
  - Area FY26 Proposed: 854.1 Structural, 20.5 Temporary, Total 874.6; FY25‑26 Percent Change Total 0.1; FY20‑26 Percent Change 9.5.
  - AFR FY25: 247.4 5.5 252.9; FY26: 247.4 5.5 252.9; FY25‑26 % change 0.0; FY20‑26 12.0.
  - APD FY25: 129.7 4.5 134.2; FY26: 131.7 4.0 135.7; FY25‑26 % change 1.1; FY20‑26 15.6.
  - EUR FY25: 183.4 5.0 188.4; FY26: 182.9 5.0 187.9; FY25‑26 % change -0.3; FY20‑26 -0.1.
  - MCD FY25: 145.5 2.0 147.5; FY26: 147.5 1.0 148.5; FY25‑26 % change 0.7; FY20‑26 11.2.
  - WHD FY25: 143.5 7.0 150.5; FY26: 144.5 5.0 149.5; FY25‑26 % change -0.7; FY20‑26 12.0.
  - Functional Non‑CD FY25: 585.1 13.5 598.5; FY26: 588.1 9.0 597.1; FY25‑26 % change -0.2; FY20‑26 19.2.
  - COM FY25: 98.0 0.0 98.0; FY26: 96.0 0.0 96.0; FY25‑26 % change -2.0; FY20‑26 6.7.
  - FIN FY25: 148.5 7.0 155.5; FY26: 152.5 5.0 157.5; FY25‑26 % change 1.3; FY20‑26 24.5.
  - RES FY25: 123.5 1.5 125.0; FY26: 123.5 1.0 124.5; FY25‑26 % change -0.4; FY20‑26 14.7.
  - SPR FY25: 215.1 5.0 220.0; FY26: 216.1 3.0 219.1; FY25‑26 % change -0.4; FY20‑26 24.5.
  - Functional CD FY25: 808.1 12.3 820.4; FY26: 809.2 8.0 817.2; FY25‑26 % change -0.4; FY20‑26 12.1.
  - FAD FY25: 185.5 5.8 191.3; FY26: 184.5 4.0 188.5; FY25‑26 % change -1.5; FY20‑26 16.4.
  - ICD FY25: 135.2 0.0 135.2; FY26: 134.2 0.0 134.2; FY25‑26 % change -0.7; FY20‑26 4.8.
  - LEG FY25: 98.7 4.5 103.2; FY26: 100.7 4.0 104.7; FY25‑26 % change 1.5; FY20‑26 25.9.
  - MCM FY25: 257.9 0.0 257.9; FY26: 257.0 0.0 257.0; FY25‑26 % change -0.4; FY20‑26 16.4.
  - STA FY25: 130.8 2.0 132.8; FY26: 132.8 0.0 132.8; FY25‑26 % change 0.0; FY20‑26 -1.5.
  - Support FY25: 601.3 14.8 616.1; FY26: 614.0 10.0 624.0; FY25‑26 % change 1.3; FY20‑26 14.2.
  - CSF FY25: 168.2 0.0 168.2; FY26: 170.0 0.0 170.0; FY25‑26 % change 1.1; FY20‑26 4.8.
  - HRD FY25: 118.0 7.8 125.8; FY26: 121.0 5.0 126.0; FY25‑26 % change 0.2; FY20‑26 14.5.
  - ITD FY25: 166.1 0.0 166.1; FY26: 172.0 0.0 172.0; FY25‑26 % change 3.6; FY20‑26 11.6.
  - OBP FY25: 19.0 1.0 20.0; FY26: 19.0 1.0 20.0; FY25‑26 % change 0.0; FY20‑26 27.4.
  - OIA FY25: 19.0 0.0 19.0; FY26: 18.0 0.0 18.0; FY25‑26 % change -5.3; FY20‑26 12.5.
  - ORM FY25: 17.0 2.0 19.0; FY26: 17.0 1.0 18.0; FY25‑26 % change -5.3; FY20‑26 80.0.
  - SEC FY25: 72.0 1.0 73.0; FY26: 75.0 0.0 75.0; FY25‑26 % change 2.7; FY20‑26 12.8.
  - TRM FY25: 22.0 3.0 25.0; FY26: 22.0 3.0 25.0; FY25‑26 % change 0.0; FY20‑26 108.3.
  - Small Offices FY25: 64.0 0.0 64.0; FY26: 64.0 0.0 64.0; FY25‑26 % change 0.0; FY20‑26 43.8.
  - Other FY25: 296.8 0.0 296.8; FY26: 300.3 0.0 300.3; (ellipsis in source).
  - OED FY25: 276.5 0.0 276.5; FY26: 277.0 0.0 277.0; FY25‑26 % change 0.2; FY20‑26 16.2.
  - IEO FY25: 15.0 0.0 15.0; FY26: 18.0 0.0 18.0; FY25‑26 % change 20.0; FY20‑26 20.0.
  - Central HR programs FY25: 5.3 0.0 5.3; FY26: 5.3 0.0 5.3; FY25‑26 % change 0.0; FY20‑26 -77.4.
  - Total FY25: 3,204.8 64.6 3,269.3; FY26: 3,229.5 47.5 3,277.0; FY25‑26 % change 0.2; FY20‑26 12.2.
  - Externally financed: 126.0 - 126.0 both FY25 and FY26; FY25‑26 % change 0.0; FY20‑26 38.2.
  - Grand Total FY25: 3,330.8 64.6 3,395.3; FY26: 3,355.5 47.5 3,403.0; FY25‑26 % change 0.2; FY20‑26 13.0.

### Table 11: Overall Budget and FTEs by Department, FY26 (selected aggregates)
- Source: OBP. Other includes OED, IEO, and central HR programs.
- Aggregate figures (preserve exact numeric entries as presented):
  - Area FY25 Budget: 849.6 Structural, 24.0 Temporary, Total 873.6. FY26 Proposed: 853.1 Structural, 20.5 Temporary, Total 873.6 (two different area presentations exist within the source tables; entries shown as in source).
  - Total (excl. donor financed) FY25: 3,204.8 Structural, 64.6 Temporary, Total 3,269.3. FY26 Proposed: 3,230.6 Structural, 46.5 Temporary, Total 3,277.1.
  - Donor financed: 126.0 - 126.0 FY25; 127.1 - 127.1 FY26 (as shown in table).
  - Grand Total FY25: 3,330.8 64.6 3,395.3. Grand Total FY26 Proposed: 3,357.7 46.5 3,404.2.
  - Share of Proposed Budget column and $FTE metrics presented in table (detailed departmental breakdown in table).

### Key summary points from Section V preview (contextual connection)
- The budget adjustments in Section 18 reflect trade‑offs needed because of unwinding of exceptional temporary resources and significant intra‑departmental reprioritization.
- Departmental structural increases concentrated in Area, Corporate, and Functional CD/support areas, while temporary resources decline for several units.

*Source: OBP; figures and text as presented in the source content.*

### Box 5. BTS Strategy

### Box 5. BTS Strategy

### Overview and scope
- The Business Technology Strategy (BTS) spans the period FY25-FY28 and focuses on five main themes: renovating core systems, embracing Artificial Intelligence, increasing cybersecurity resilience, rationalizing the Fund’s technology backbone, and building a fit-for-purpose IT workforce.
- IT-intensive investments will be informed by BTS to guide the Fund’s digital ambition, IT operating model, and technology investments over the medium term.
- HQ1-related lifecycle investments will wind down as the HQ2 Refresh begins to ramp up, with related implementation sequenced through FY36.

### Cyber Security Strategy — objectives and planned actions
- The Fund’s 2024 Enterprise Risk Management report highlighted cyber risk and the need for ongoing investment.
- The Cybersecurity Strategy emphasizes continued investment in identify, protect, and detect capabilities and new investment in governance, response, and recovery capabilities.
- Strategy aims (enumerated):
  - implement an e-GRC system (in partnership with ORM and the Data Privacy Function) to provide a holistic view of the Fund’s information security risk posture and improve cyber risk governance capabilities;
  - develop enhanced education and awareness training targeted to privileged access users and high-profile staff;
  - fast track the move to a zero-trust environment by securing remote access capabilities, implementing strong and frictionless authentication mechanisms, and strengthening Identity and Access Management systems/processes;
  - broaden the coverage of security incident and event monitoring capabilities to include the Fund’s multi-cloud environment;
  - re-establish the Fund’s cyber threat intel capability; and,
  - test and improve incident, personal data breach management, and crisis response plans.
- Projected spending:
  - Cybersecurity/data privacy spending of $8 million in FY25;
  - An additional $25 million proposed over the medium term in direct costs;
  - $6 million in recurring cloud costs by FY28.
- Risk assessment: Cyber/data privacy assessed as a major risk in the Enterprise Risk Self-Assessment for FY26-28.

### AI Investment — initiatives, expected benefits, and costs
- Initial GenAI steps include guidance on secure usage, GenAI governance via an inter-departmental coordination committee, and adoption of a secure AI Digital Assistant.
- Over the next four years, eight AI capital projects across three AI domains — Foundation, General Purpose AI, and Specialized AI — are planned to integrate GenAI gradually and responsibly.
- Anticipated industry benchmark efficiency gain: average efficiency gains of 30 minutes per user per day.
- Planned spending:
  - About $14 million of direct AI capital spending over the medium term;
  - Cloud-related costs projected at $4 million by FY28.
- Key AI initiatives listed:
  - AI maturity assessments (to guide AI adoption);
  - Microsoft Copilot (to integrate Generative AI into Microsoft 365 tools);
  - StatGPT (for streamlined data analysis, visualization, and international collaboration);
  - Knowledge Graph (boost metadata consistency, discovery, and cross-country analysis);
  - AIDA 2.0 (upgrade the Fund's AI Digital Assistant for self-service translation and document summarization);
  - Specialized AI use cases (tailoring AI to specific Fund processes).

### ERP modernization — rationale and approach
- Current ERP platform: PeopleSoft — in use for over two decades, highly customized, limited product enhancements from Oracle, requiring a proactive modernization plan.
- Early work underway to develop a comprehensive ERP Strategy to move to a best-of-suite ERP landscape, while making interim gains in modernizing budget management, field office financials systems, travel, and addressing Workday-related user experience challenges.
- Decision on choice or mix of platforms requires careful consideration of data flows, integrations, and add-on possible failure points.
- Initial projections for costs will be discussed as part of the FY27-29 capital budget.

### Medium-term budget and cloud/CCE considerations
- Cloud costs (CCE) are projected to increase to $25.0 million due to higher unit prices and retirement of on-premises systems.
- Cyber-related needs will be absorbed in the existing envelope.
- Lifecycle replacements and IT infrastructure investments will fund network equipment, servers, storage capacity, and end-user equipment (laptops and mobile devices), considering staff growth.

### Risks and governance linkages
- BTS and related ITD and STA plans are referenced in the Enterprise Risk framework and the FY25-27 Medium-term Budget risk self-assessment.
- Cyber/data privacy has been incorporated as a new major risk requiring ongoing investment and monitoring.
- Capital and modernization risk remains moderate, with concerns about project delays, cost overruns, growing cloud capital expenses, ERP replacement needs, rapidly changing IT landscape (including Artificial Intelligence), and sizable facilities investments.
- Mitigations include more strategic prioritization and monitoring (through CBIT), long-term facilities planning, and closer monitoring of capital planning and execution (including CCE) as part of strengthened governance and organizational capacity.

*Source: ppea2025015 - Box 5. BTS Strategy*

### 3. Financing for investments in IT and building improvements and repairs. Given the long-term

### 3. Financing for investments in IT and building improvements and repairs. Given the long-term

### Capital budget rules and scope
- Capital budgets are available for three years, after which unspent appropriations lapse.
- Projects in the capital budget cover:
  - acquisition of building or IT equipment;
  - construction, major renovation, or repairs;
  - major IT software development or infrastructure projects.

### Cloud Capital Equivalent (CCE)
- CCE is a sub-category within the capital budget for cloud subscription costs, established as per the budgetary treatment approved by the Board in April 2021.
- The CCE was introduced in response to the Fund’s migration from a “purchase/build and maintain” software model to a model based on cloud-hosted platforms with subscription costs, which would have, all else equal, reduced capital spending and increased administrative spending.

### Budgetary context and selected numbers (FY20–FY26 and FY26 projections)
- Total Gross Administrative Envelope (series as presented): 1,744; 1,640; 1,834; 1,685; 1,873; 1,727; 1,925; 1,770; 1,937 (Millions of FY25 U.S. dollars).
- Buildings, IT and Other totals (series as presented): 281; 273; 274; 261; 264; 248; 270; 252; 272 (Millions of FY25 U.S. dollars).
- Information technology (row values as presented): 88; 81; 79; 77; 71; 73; 76; 72; 76 (Millions of FY25 U.S. dollars).
- Receipts totals and components (series as presented):
  - Receipts totals: 290; 242; 281; 168; 293; 253; 307; 269; 325; 282; 329 (Millions of FY25 U.S. dollars).
  - Externally financed receipts (series as presented): 243; 200; 244; 134; 254; 216; 261; 228; 276; 241; 280 (Millions of FY25 U.S. dollars).
  - General receipts (series as presented): 47; 42; 37; 34; 39; 37; 46; 42; 49; 41; 49 (Millions of FY25 U.S. dollars).

### Capital budget flows and FY20–FY26 nominal capital budget excerpt (Millions of U.S. dollars)
- FY 20:
  - New appropriations (36): 414
  - Total funds available (37) = (35)+(36): 896; 839; 196 (table layout preserved as presented)
  - Expenditures (38): 424; 223; 107
  - Lapsed funds (39): 200; 2
  - Remaining funds (40) = (38)-(39): 452; 616; 88
- FY 21:
  - New appropriations (41): 425; 609; 9
  - Total funds available (42) = (40)+(41): 888; 216; 186
  - Expenditures (43): 2650; 277
  - Lapsed funds (44): 200; 2
  - Remaining funds (45) = (42)-(43)-(44): 603; 315; 107
- FY 22:
  - New appropriations (46): 2446; 100; 79
  - Total funds available (47) = (45)+(46): 8379; 101; 5186
  - Expenditures (48): 22609;-190
  - Lapsed funds (49): 8000; 8
  - Remaining funds (50) = (47)-(48)-(49): 5418; 01687
- FY 23:
  - New appropriations (51): 1944; 150; 78
  - Total funds available (52) = (50)+(51): 7362; 151; 65
  - Expenditures (53): 3845; 13095
  - Lapsed funds (54): 7021625
  - Remaining funds (55) = (52)-(53)-(54): 27180045
- FY 24:
  - New appropriations (56): 4741200108
  - Total funds available (57) = (55)+(56): 7558200153
  - Expenditures (58): 4942200111
  - Lapsed funds (59): 00101
  - Remaining funds (60) = (57)-(58)-(59): 25170042
- FY 25 (Est):
  - New appropriations (61): 5445230122
  - Total funds available (62) = (60)+(61): 7962230164
  - Expenditures (Est)(63): 6044220126
  - Lapsed funds (Est)(64): 01102
  - Remaining funds (Est)(66) = (62)-(63)-(64): 19160036
- FY 26 (Prop.):
  - New appropriations (Prop.)(67): 6245260133
  - Total funds available (Est.)(68) = (66)+(67): 8161260168

### Policy and resource implications from selected reviews (high-level)
- IEO Evaluation: The Evolving Application of the IMF’s Mandate (June 2024) and MIP: IEO Evaluation on The Evolving Application of the IMF’s Mandate (February, 2025)
  - Proposed recommendations to enhance decision-making for Fund engagement in new policy areas, improve budget data tracking by policy area across all Fund activities and operations, and adopt an Executive Board approved high-level Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners.
  - The MIP proposed activities to enhance decision-making, strengthen budget data, and update the 2022 Surveillance Guidance Note; budget implication is neutral if activities proceed as planned because they can be absorbed within existing workstreams.
- 2024 Review of the Fund’s Transparency Policy and Open Archives Policy (November 2024)
  - Notes that transitional additional resources might be needed, but medium-term net impact on staff resources would likely be neutral provided savings from proposed actions and improvements in publication of staff reports are realized.
- Communications strategy review (November 2024)
  - Proposed updating and modernizing communications with a focus on being more selective, strengthening IMF-controlled channels, uniting traditional media with social media, and deepening regional media engagement; budget implication is neutral under a flat real budget assumption.

*Source: ppea2025015 - 3. Financing for investments in IT and building improvements and repairs. Given the long-term (IMF).*

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/pp/2025/english/ppea2025015.pdf_