## ppea2025018 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [ppea2025018 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY](https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/pp/2025/english/ppea2025018.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/files/publications/pp/2025/english/ppea2025018.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/files/publications/pp/2025/english/ppea2025018.pdf.json)

---

### Purpose and scope
- Management Implementation Plan (MIP) responding to the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO)’s report on the Evolving Application of the IMF’s Mandate.
- MIP addresses four IEO recommendations aimed to:
  - (i) Enhance the decision-making process for Fund engagement in new policy areas;
  - (ii) Produce budget data that allows tracking by policy area across all Fund activities and operations;
  - (iii) Enhance clarity of key elements regarding surveillance in new policy areas;
  - (iv) Adopt an Executive Board-approved high-level Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners.
- Document date: March 11, 2025.

### High-level approach and resource implications
- Leverage existing and planned workstreams, notably the 2026 Comprehensive Surveillance Review (2026 CSR), updated budget reporting efforts, and existing collaboration modalities.
- Resource summary:
  - Proposed activities to enhance decision-making, strengthen budget data, and update the 2022 Surveillance Guidance Note build on existing processes.
  - Development of high-level principles on engagement with partners expected to require only modest gross resources.
  - Resource costs could be absorbed within the current budgetary envelope if work proceeds as planned.
  - Deeper engagement with partners and new/additional policy area work would likely require additional net resourcing.

### Board reactions and context
- Executive Board discussed the IEO evaluation on June 10, 2024, and endorsed the four main recommendations.
- Board observations summarized:
  - Support to enhance decision-making for engagement in new policy areas; noted prior processes perceived as not fully inclusive and urged stronger linkages between scope, resources, and risk assessment.
  - Support for improving budget data to allow tracking by policy area; Board to advise OBP on which policy areas to track and required granularity.
  - Support for updating the 2022 Guidance Note for Surveillance under Article IV Consultations; Management plans update following the 2026 CSR.
  - Most Directors supported or were open to adopting a high-level Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners while questioning whether high-level principles can fully address operational challenges.

### Condensed IEO recommendations
- Recommendation 1: Enhance decision-making process by:
  - Developing an inclusive Fund-wide institutional strategy for engagement in new policy areas.
  - Linking scope, required resources, and risk management when endorsing individual strategies.
  - Elements to include: assessment of alternative options and desired level of engagement; assessment of budget, size, and risk profile impacts including staff work pressures and well-being; assessment of balance between flexibility and consistency, and principles for evenhandedness.
- Recommendation 2: Produce budget data to allow tracking by policy area across all Fund activities and operations.
  - Propose multidimensional tracking (by output area, country grouping, department, and policy area).
  - Note significant resource implications and potential need to adapt time registration or invest in a multidimensional system; counsel Board to review policy areas to track and granularity.
- Recommendation 3: Update the 2022 Guidance Note for Surveillance under Article IV Consultations to clarify perimeter, provision of policy advice, depth, frequency, and uniformity of treatment in new policy areas.
- Recommendation 4: Adopt an Executive Board-approved high-level Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners to anchor collaboration while retaining flexibility.

### MIP key actions and instruments
- Overarching approach:
  - Implement several “SMART” (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and timebound) actions leveraging the 2026 CSR, existing strategies, and budget and risk processes.
- Decision-making (Recommendation 1) — three-step approach:
  - Step 1 — Set forward-looking surveillance priorities through the 2026 CSR:
    - Executive Board to set forward-looking surveillance priorities and desired level of engagement over the medium term.
    - CSR envisaged in two phases:
      - Phase 1: develop high-level forward-looking priorities for the next 5-10 years.
      - Phase 2: outline high-level principles for desired level (depth, breadth, frequency) of engagement; consider tradeoffs grounded in enterprise risk assessment and available expertise.
    - CSR to discuss directional budgetary implications; precise costing to follow in Calibration and Costing.
    - Desired level of engagement defined as a “medium-term” concept; engagement may advance gradually linked to resourcing.
  - Step 2 — Calibrate and cost core deliverables consistent with surveillance priorities:
    - Core deliverables include surveillance, lending, capacity development (CSR covers surveillance).
    - Individual strategies for each new policy area and periodic reviews to translate priorities into deliverables/timelines and include detailed cost assessments.
    - Outcomes feed into annual budget formulation; medium-term budget and outturn reporting to present accommodation of new initiatives, consolidate gross and net costs, highlight savings, and report actual spending vs expectations.
    - Enterprise risk coverage via Risk Control Self-Assessments (RCSAs), Document Risk Self-Assessments (DRSAs), and ORM Risk Reports.
    - Board Work Program (BWP) to continue including costing of items coming to the Board.
  - Step 3 — Strengthen planning and implementation:
    - Strategy teams to update implementation plans to reflect material changes and integrate updates into periodic strategy documents to the Board.
    - Updates to incorporate impacts of annual resourcing decisions, spending vs expectations, major deviations, and tradeoffs.
- Iterative strategic cycle timing:
  - Cycle kicks off in May/June with the Annual Strategic Dialogue (and in 2026, approval of the CSR), budget process starts in September, preliminary Board discussion in early March, budget approval in late April; strategy updates inform budget formulation.

### Budget data and tracking (Recommendation 2)
- Rationale: high-quality budget data are essential to confirm prudent resource use, ensure priorities are resourced, and support holistic prioritization and tradeoffs.
- Identified data needs:
  - Costing: projected scale of needs linked to operational plans/deliverables.
  - Approved budget: reflects tradeoffs and may differ from projected requirements.
  - Actual spending and spending versus budget: to identify pressure points and reprioritization opportunities.
- Recent and ongoing efforts:
  - Address legacy process/system/documentation issues; support HR, CD, and corporate data storage projects; plan for Fund-wide Enterprise Resource Planning.
  - Improve reporting: expand clarity, timeliness, and granularity; advance annual data gathering and projection processes for earlier reporting.
  - Costing non-recurrent Board Work Program items: continue FY24-introduced process.
  - Costing Strategy/Policy reviews: update staff-level guidance for consistent costing information.
  - Tracking spending in key policy areas: expand information for debt, climate, governance, digital money, gender/inclusion, macro-financial surveillance, Fragile and Conflict-Affected States; FY24 outturn paper presented budgets and spending for selected areas; economic work on AI and Trade/Fragmentation to be introduced in FY26.
- Lessons from augmentation: augmentation-linked work helped link budgets and deliverables for five areas and monitor delivery relative to expectations.

### Box 2 — The Fund’s Budget Data (summary)
- Outputs:
  - Data collection/reporting structured around strategic output categories: Bilateral Surveillance; Lending; CD; Multilateral Surveillance; Global Cooperation and Standards; Fund policy; Analytical work; Fund Governance and Membership; Fund Finances; and Corporate Functions.
  - 49 sub-codes used across budget and strategy reporting (the Fund Thematic Framework).
  - CD activities: more granular data through CDMAP at project/portfolio level (workstream; funding source; delivery department; recipient country and department).
- Topics: work underway to expand budgets/spending information by an additional topic/policy area dimension.
- Inputs:
  - Strong data on budgets/spending by traditional inputs — staff and non-staff spending (travel; subscriptions) at aggregate and departmental level and by funding source.
  - Personnel-oriented reporting: some 78 percent of Fund administrative spending relates to personnel; monitoring includes staff vs. non-staff personnel numbers, locations, levels; skills; utilization; vacancy rates; workforce planning tools linked to Workday position data.
- Outturns: annual budget/spending reports set out changes in expected and actual spending and sources of savings.
- Metrics: detailed data on utilization, overtime tracking, average costs and volume/price changes; current data indicate a very constrained budget context with high utilization, limited buffers, and high overtime.
- Costing: budget reports summarize costing in strategy/policy documents and work underway to ensure consistency and robust tradeoff consideration.
- Engagement: budget proposals informed by Board engagements and interdepartmental consultation under the Accountability Framework.

### Tools, systems, and modernization to support budget data
- OBP to work with ITD and TRM to align IT-intensive process/system changes with modernization needs, staff capacity constraints, and change management needs.
- Modernization goals:
  - Simplify, harmonize, and automate end-to-end business processes where possible.
  - Strengthen ease of use for budget teams and expand user-friendly dashboards (workforce planning; budget data access; mapping between budget system and CDMAP).
  - Assess mechanisms for data collection/reporting using best practices, end-user input, and cost-benefit analysis to avoid excessive reporting burdens and protect data quality.
- Ongoing Board engagement: formal and informal sessions to seek input; the new medium-term strategic planning cycle to give the Board additional guidance opportunities.

### Operational guidance, surveillance update, and timelines (Recommendation 3)
- Operational guidance and recent actions:
  - Publication of the 2022 Surveillance Guidance Note (SGN).
  - Post-Institutional Safeguards Review (ISR) management guidance on evenhanded treatment.
  - Board-approved strategies in new policy areas phased in over time.
- Coverage and guidance by policy area (selected):
  - Climate: 2025 climate strategy update to take stock of implementation of the 2021 climate strategy and outline potential ways forward.
  - Digital Money (DM): 2025 note on Coverage of Crypto Assets in Article IV Surveillance to provide guidance on conditions for coverage; 2024 Note on Digital Money explores IMS implications.
  - Gender: 2024 Interim Guidance Note on Mainstreaming Gender at the IMF provides guidance on integrating macrocritical gender issues, “light touch” vs “deep dive”, program integration, CD with a gender lens, synergies, and partner collaboration.
  - Governance: 2023 Review of Implementation of the 2018 Framework for Enhanced Fund Engagement on Governance provides stocktaking and proposals.
  - Social spending: 2024 Operational Guidance Note for IMF Engagement on Social Spending Issues provides operational guidance for surveillance, IMF-supported programs, and CD.
- Surveillance guidance update and timeline:
  - Staff will publish a revised Staff Guidance Note for Surveillance in Article IV Consultations after the 2026 CSR.
  - CSR will assess implementation of the CSR 2021 surveillance priorities; updated guidance note to be published in 2027.
  - Implementation sequencing:
    - First phase: internal operational guidance to consolidate assessments of macro-criticality, expertise, depth, frequency, and evenhandedness — Accountability: SPR with inputs from other departments by end-June 2025.
    - Second phase: publication of revised Staff Guidance Note for Surveillance — Accountability: SPR with inputs from other departments by December 2027.

### Executive Board-Approved Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners (Recommendation 4)
- Purpose: establish a coherent best-practice framework to anchor engagement with external partners while retaining flexibility for country-specific needs.
- Planned actions:
  - Stock take of existing agreements and formalized modalities across surveillance, lending, and CD to inform principles.
  - Draft high-level principles covering rationale, scope, roles and responsibilities, consistency with Fund policies and Fund Law, resource implications, monitoring and review modalities, and communication/transparency.
  - Possible staff guidelines to accompany the high-level principles outlining consultation, review, and approval guidelines.
- Accountability and timeline:
  - SPR in consultation with LEG and other departments to submit the high-level Statement of Principles for Executive Board approval in September 2025.

### Enterprise risk assessment and mitigants
- Key risks:
  - Reputational risk if a more holistic approach is not implemented, undermining credibility and effectiveness.
  - Operational and business risks from misalignment between strategy ambition and implementation and from inadequate expertise impacting analytical accuracy.
- Controls and mitigants:
  - Enhanced decision-making process for engagement in new policy areas (Recommendation 1).
  - Update and publish the surveillance guidance note after the 2026 CSR.
  - Improved internal communication, streamlined Board Work Program, and reprioritization to address work pressures.
  - Integration of budgetary and risk considerations and an Executive Board-approved Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners.
- Overall assessment:
  - Enterprise risks from implementing the MIP are limited and lower than risks from inaction.
  - Inaction could increase reputational and operational risks through resource constraints affecting policy traction.
  - Clear communication via the Board Work Program and Global Policy Agenda and continued collaboration with partners can mitigate potential reputational/business risks.

### Implementation commitments, accountability, and timeline (selected)
- Management committed to a holistic and consultative prioritization framework to be developed in the 2026 CSR with elements applied in the FY26 budget cycle and full implementation in FY27.
- OBP to report on progress against initiatives to strengthen budget data as part of the FY27-29 medium-term budget (by end-FY26).
- SPR with inputs from other departments:
  - Internal operational guidance update by end-June 2025.
  - Submission of high-level Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners to Executive Board for approval (September 2025).
  - Publication of revised Staff Guidance Note for Surveillance in Article IV Consultations by December 2027.

*Source: Management Implementation Plan and accompanying text in the MIP on the IEO Evaluation of IMF’s Mandate.*

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

### ppea2025018 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

### Purpose and scope
- Management Implementation Plan (MIP) proposing actions in response to the Board-endorsed recommendations from the Independent Evaluation Office (IEO)’s report on the Evolving Application of the IMF’s Mandate.
- MIP addresses four IEO recommendations aimed to:
  - (i) Enhance the decision-making process for Fund engagement in new policy areas;
  - (ii) Address operational challenges by producing budget data in a manner that allows tracking by policy area across all Fund activities and operations;
  - (iii) Enhance the clarity of key elements regarding surveillance in new policy areas; and
  - (iv) Adopt an Executive Board-approved high-level Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners.

### High-level approach
- Staff will leverage existing and planned workstreams to implement recommendations, specifically:
  - The ongoing Comprehensive Surveillance Review (2026 CSR) will propose desired levels of engagement in new policy areas consistent with forward-looking surveillance priorities, consideration of tradeoffs grounded in enterprise risk assessment, and available expertise. An updated Surveillance Guidance Note will be published following the conclusion of the 2026 CSR.
  - The MIP builds on the existing budget framework and recent efforts to update and strengthen budget data reporting to support strategic prioritization and budget monitoring.
  - Existing modalities for collaboration with external partners will provide the basis for an Executive Board-approved high-level Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners.
- Resource implications summary:
  - Proposed activities to enhance decision-making on new policy areas, strengthen budget data, and update the 2022 Surveillance Guidance Note build on and reinforce existing processes.
  - Development of high-level principles on engagement with partners is expected to require only modest gross resources.
  - The resource cost of these activities could be absorbed within the current budgetary envelope for their respective workstreams if the work proceeds as planned.
  - Deeper engagement with partners and any additional policy areas the Fund engages in would likely require additional net resourcing.
- Document date: March 11, 2025.

### Board reactions and context
- The Executive Board discussed the IEO evaluation on June 10, 2024, and endorsed the IEO’s four main recommendations.
- Board observations summarized:
  - Support to enhance decision-making for engagement in new policy areas; noted perception that prior engagement processes were not fully inclusive and stressed strengthening linkages between scope, resources, and risk assessment.
  - Support for improving budget data to allow tracking by policy area; Board to advise OBP on which policy areas to track and required granularity, balancing costs and benefits.
  - Support for updating the 2022 Guidance Note for Surveillance under Article IV Consultations, with consideration of tradeoffs between specificity and flexibility; Management plans to update guidance following the 2026 CSR.
  - Most Directors supported or were open to adopting a high-level Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners while noting questions about whether high-level principles can fully address operational challenges arising from diverse engagements.

### IEO recommendations (condensed)
- Recommendation 1: Enhance the decision-making process by:
  - Developing an inclusive Fund-wide institutional strategy for engagement in new policy areas.
  - Taking a holistic approach when endorsing individual strategies by linking scope, required resources, and risk management implications.
  - Elements to include: assessment of alternative options and desired level of engagement; assessment of budget, size, and risk profile impacts including staff work pressures and well-being; assessment of balance between flexibility and consistency, and principles for evenhandedness.
- Recommendation 2: Produce budget data to allow tracking by policy area across all Fund activities and operations.
  - Propose multidimensional tracking (by output area, country grouping, department, and policy area).
  - Note significant resource implications and potential need to adapt time registration or invest in a multidimensional system; counsel Board to review policy areas to track and granularity.
- Recommendation 3: Update the 2022 Guidance Note for Surveillance under Article IV Consultations to enhance clarity about:
  - Perimeter (criteria for macrocriticality, coverage, time horizons);
  - Provision of policy advice (assessing IMF expertise and applicability of IMF expertise filter);
  - Depth (relevance, severity, urgency, and depths of engagement);
  - Frequency (when and how often to engage);
  - Uniformity of treatment (definition of “similar circumstances” and output-based approaches to evenhandedness).
- Recommendation 4: Adopt an Executive Board-approved high-level Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners to provide an institutional anchor and coherent best practice framework while retaining flexibility.

### Management Implementation Plan (MIP) — Key actions and instruments
- Overarching approach:
  - Implement several “SMART” (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and timebound) actions that leverage the 2026 CSR, existing strategies, budget, and risk processes to integrate policy priorities with resources and risk assessments cost-effectively.
- Recommendation 1 (Enhance decision-making for new policy areas):
  - Leverage the 2026 CSR and existing decision-making processes to guide surveillance prioritization, including:
    - Assess which policy areas to engage in and desired level and pace of engagement.
    - Assess expertise requirements and implications for budget and risk profile, including impact on work pressures.
  - Budget-related measures:
    - Continue Board work program costing, reintroduced last year, highlighting cost of all non-recurrent items going to the Board.
    - Ensure more consistent, standardized upfront costing of gross and net resource requirements for new initiatives and policy reviews to set expectations about feasible engagement within constrained budgets versus with additional net resourcing.
    - Integrate standardized resourcing estimates into the medium-term budget presentation and strengthen annexes setting out resource implications for policy/strategy discussions.
    - Monitor and report on actual resourcing (relative to estimates) as part of regular strategy updates and budgets, particularly in early implementation stages (see Recommendation 2).
  - Risk-related measures:
    - Introduce more consistent documentation of risks, risk ratings, and related action plans in department policy proposals and strategy papers through Document Risk Self Assessments (DRSAs).
    - Report aggregate risk considerations of Fund operations in bi-annual Enterprise Risk Reports.

### Implementation framing and next steps
- MIP emphasizes synergies with existing workstreams and mindful resource use.
- MIP includes SMART actions, timing, and responsibility for implementation (detailed in Annex).
- The five specified topical areas in the IEO report (climate, digital, governance, gender, and social spending) are considered under “new policy areas” in this MIP.
- Note on terminology: In this MIP, “new policy areas” refer to topical areas expanding the scope of traditional policies subject to bilateral surveillance per the Integrated Surveillance Decision (ISD), IMF 2012, such as exchange rate, monetary, fiscal, and financial sector policies (both macroeconomic and macroeconomically relevant structural aspects).

*Prepared under the guidance of Daria Zakharova (SPR); Approved by Ceyla Pazarbasioglu (SPR) and Michele Shannon (OBP); prepared by Sarah Sanya with inputs from Fabian Bornhorst, Anna Ilyina, Miroslav Josic (SPR), Laurence Allain, and Chuling Chen (OBP).*

### 11.  Building on this ongoing work, staff propose to address Recommendation 1 in three

### 11.  Building on this ongoing work, staff propose to address Recommendation 1 in three

### Proposed three-step approach to implement Recommendation 1
- Step 1 — Set forward-looking surveillance priorities through the 2026 CSR:
  - The Executive Board would set the forward-looking surveillance priorities and the desired level of engagement in the relevant policy areas over the medium term.
  - Prior CSRs set surveillance priorities without explicitly linking them to expected scope of engagement, resources, and risks, contributing to expansion in designated new policy areas beyond limits to resources and expertise and rising work pressures.
  - The ongoing 2026 CSR is envisaged to proceed in two phases as part of a broader strategic planning framework:
    - Phase 1: Develop at a high level the forward-looking surveillance priorities for the next 5-10 years, building on ongoing work on assessing the evolving surveillance landscape, lessons from implementation of the 2021 CSR priorities, the ongoing Fund for the Future workstream, and strategies in the new policy areas.
    - Phase 2: Outline high-level principles for determining the desired level (depth, breadth, and frequency) of engagement in the new policy areas consistent with Phase 1 priorities, and consider tradeoffs grounded in enterprise risk assessment and available expertise.
  - The CSR will discuss budgetary implications at a directional level; more precise costing will come at the next stage (see Calibration and Costing).
  - The CSR will clarify that the desired level of engagement is a “medium-term” concept: engagement may advance gradually toward the desired level linked to appropriate resourcing; recalibrating existing policy areas would also proceed gradually to manage operational disruptions and preserve institutional expertise.

- Step 2 — Calibrate and cost the Fund’s core deliverables consistent with surveillance priorities:
  - Core deliverables include surveillance, lending, and capacity development, though only surveillance is covered in the CSR. Holistic strategy, resourcing, and enterprise risk consideration will occur through iterative processes across new-policy-area strategies, periodic workplans, and the available budget.
  - Specific elements:
    - Individual strategies for each new policy area and periodic reviews will translate surveillance priorities into concrete deliverables and timelines across activities, include detailed cost assessments, clarify desired output levels and realistic achievements within current budget constraints, and clarify tradeoffs and external funding considerations where applicable. Strategies will consider overlaps between lending and surveillance.
    - Outcomes will feed into the annual budget formulation process; medium-term budget and outturn reporting will present how new initiatives were accommodated within the budget envelope, consolidate gross and net costs from strategy/policy updates, highlight sources of savings, report actual spending against expectations and major deviations, and preserve flexibility for additional Board/management sessions.
    - Enterprise risk coverage will be achieved by conducting Risk Control Self-Assessments (RCSAs) on critical business processes, Document Risk Self-Assessments (DRSAs) on critical strategy and policy decisions, and analytical aggregation in the Office of Risk Management’s (ORM) Risk Reports.
    - The Board Work Program (BWP) will continue to include costing of items coming to the Board.

- Step 3 — Strengthen planning and implementation of Fund priorities:
  - After agreement on updated implementation priorities and budget envelopes across surveillance, lending, and CD, strategy teams will update implementation plans to reflect material changes; such updates are currently included in budget reporting and will be explicitly incorporated in periodic strategy document updates to the Board.
  - Strategy updates will incorporate the material impact of annual resourcing decisions on deliverables and timelines, reflect budget implications including spending versus expectations and major deviations and associated tradeoffs, and continue to assess ongoing coverage and relevance of defined areas.
  - As activities are mainstreamed, updates will be integrated into regular policy and strategy reviews.

### How the iterative process fits the strategic cycle
- Cycle timing and linkages:
  - The strategic cycle kicks off in May/June with the Annual Strategic Dialogue with the Board (and in 2026, the approval of the CSR), leading into the budget process which kicks off in September, includes dialogue and negotiation of envelopes in the winter, moves to a preliminary discussion with the Board in early March, and culminates with the approval of the budget in late April.
  - Strategy updates during this cycle inform budget formulation.

### Recommendation 2 response — Produce budget data that allows tracking by policy area across all Fund activities and operations
- Rationale:
  - High-quality budget data are essential to confirm prudent use of Fund resources, ensure strategic priorities are well-resourced, and support holistic prioritization and tradeoff decisions in a constrained budget context.
- Data needs identified:
  - Costing: projected scale of needs in new areas (or changes in needs), based on operational plans/deliverables linked to agreed objectives and funding considerations; recognizes need for a sequential and iterative process allowing strategy ideation and deep dives alongside holistic prioritization.
  - Approved budget: may differ from original projected requirements reflecting tradeoffs; differences imply changes in deliverables and/or sequencing.
  - Actual spending and spending versus budget: helps identify pressure points or reprioritization opportunities; supports reassessment of scale of needs in given strategies.
- Recent and ongoing efforts to strengthen budget data:
  - Address legacy issues with processes, systems, and documentation; support budget aspects of HR, CD, and corporate data storage projects; plan for Fund-wide Enterprise Resource Planning; update workflows and accountabilities; invest in solutions for complex reporting linked to temporary crisis and augmentation-related data needs.
  - Improve reporting: expand clarity, timeliness, and granularity using existing data; advance annual data gathering and projection processes to allow earlier reporting on next year’s budget plans.
  - Costing non-recurrent Board Work Program items: continue the process introduced in FY24 for Work Program reports.
  - Costing of Strategy/Policy reviews: update staff-level guidance to support more consistent costing information in strategy and policy discussions; summarize in consolidated budget reporting.
  - Tracking spending in key policy areas: expand information on selected strategic topical areas (debt, climate, governance, digital money, gender/inclusion, macro-financial surveillance, Fragile and Conflict-Affected States) covering both budgets and spending; FY24 outturn paper presented budgets and spending for selected areas; information on economic work on AI and Trade/Fragmentation will be introduced in FY26.
- Lessons from augmentation:
  - The budget data framework benefited from work during and following the augmentation exercise linking budgets and deliverables for the five areas covered by the augmentation; delivery has been monitored relative to expectations and helped identify pressure points (see Section III of the FY24 outturn paper).

### Box 2 summary — The Fund’s Budget Data
- Outputs:
  - Data collection and reporting structured around strategic output categories: Bilateral Surveillance; Lending; CD; Multilateral Surveillance; Global Cooperation and Standards; Fund policy; Analytical work; Fund Governance and Membership; Fund Finances; and Corporate Functions.
  - 49 sub-codes used across budget and strategy reporting (the Fund Thematic Framework).
  - CD activities: more granular data collected through CDMAP at project/portfolio level (workstream; funding source; delivery department; recipient country and department).
- Topics:
  - Work underway to expand information on budgets/spending by an additional topic/policy area dimension.
- Inputs:
  - Strong data on budgets/spending by traditional inputs — staff and non-staff spending (travel; subscriptions) at aggregate and departmental level and by funding source.
  - Personnel-oriented reporting: some 78 percent of Fund administrative spending relates to personnel; monitoring includes staff vs. non-staff personnel numbers, locations, levels; skills; utilization; vacancy rates; workforce planning tools linked to Workday position data.
- Outturns:
  - Annual budget/spending reports set out changes in expected and actual spending and sources of savings.
- Metrics:
  - Detailed data on utilization, overtime tracking, average costs and volume/price changes for key expenditures; current data point to a very constrained budget context with high utilization, limited buffers, and high overtime; in a zero-flat budget context, reprioritization is the source of space for new activities.
- Costing:
  - Budget reports summarize costing in strategy/policy documents for the given year and recognize the need to integrate these needs into broader budget formulation and tradeoffs; work underway to ensure consistency and robust consideration of tradeoffs.
- Engagement:
  - Budget proposals are informed by Board engagements on strategy, policy, and corporate needs and are the product of interdepartmental engagement and consultation under the Accountability Framework; regular and ad hoc Board briefings during the budget cycle inform budget utilization, budget space assessment, department demands, and proposals for re-allocation.

### Tools, systems, and modernization to support budget data collection and reporting
- Staff actions:
  - OBP will work with ITD and TRM to ensure IT-intensive process and systems changes are aligned with broader modernization needs, staff capacity constraints, and change management needs.
  - Key modernization goals: simplify, harmonize, and where possible automate end-to-end business processes; strengthen ease of use for budget teams; expand user-friendly dashboards (workforce planning; budget data access; mapping between budget system and CDMAP).
  - Assess best mechanisms for data collection/reporting using best practices, expert advice, end-user input, and cost-benefit analysis; avoid excessive reporting burdens and protect data quality.
- Ongoing engagement with the Board:
  - Use formal and informal sessions to seek input on strengthening budget data collection and reporting to support strategic decision-making and resource allocation for new policy areas and rebalancing existing ones.
  - The new medium-term strategic planning cycle will give the Board additional opportunities to provide guidance on new policy areas and related data needs.

*— IMF staff text (content unit).*

### 24.    Staff have sought to clarify guidance to support high-quality and evenhanded

### 24.    Staff have sought to clarify guidance to support high-quality and evenhanded

### Operational guidance and recent actions
- Specific actions undertaken to support high-quality and evenhanded engagement in new policy areas:
  - Publication of the 2022 Surveillance Guidance Note (SGN).
  - Post-Institutional Safeguards Review (ISR) management guidance on evenhanded treatment of new policy areas in surveillance.
  - Board-approved strategies in new policy areas that have been phased in over time.
- Ongoing process to ensure operational guidance reflects implementation experience from Fund strategies in new policy areas.

### Coverage and guidance by policy area
- Climate
  - The 2025 climate strategy update is envisaged to take stock of implementation of the Fund's climate strategy and outline potential ways forward.
  - The update builds on: the 2021 climate strategy, the 2021 CSR and its Background paper on Climate Change, and the 2022 Staff Guidance Note on surveillance.
- Digital Money (DM)
  - The 2025 note on Coverage of Crypto Assets in Article IV Surveillance is expected to provide guidance on conditions for coverage, specify aspects to cover, and offer options for tailored policy recommendations.
  - The 2024 Note on Digital Money, Cross-Border Payments, International Reserves, and the Global Financial Safety Net explores possible implications of DM for the International Monetary System (IMS).
- Gender
  - The 2024 Interim Guidance Note on Mainstreaming Gender at the IMF provides guidance on integrating macrocritical gender issues into surveillance, lending, and capacity development, including:
    - i) identification and assessment of macrocritical gender gaps in member countries;
    - ii) the “light touch” vs “deep dive” coverage approach;
    - iii) early insights on integrating gender into IMF-supported programs;
    - iv) capacity development with a gender lens;
    - v) synergies with other workstreams;
    - vi) the importance of collaboration with partners.
- Governance
  - The 2023 Review of Implementation of the 2018 Framework for Enhanced Fund Engagement on Governance provides a comprehensive stocktaking and makes specific proposals to further improve implementation of the Framework.
- Social spending
  - The 2024 Operational Guidance Note for IMF Engagement on Social Spending Issues provides operational guidance on when and how to engage on social spending issues in surveillance, IMF-supported programs, and capacity development.

### Surveillance guidance update and timeline
- Upon conclusion of the 2026 CSR, the IMF will publish a revised Staff Guidance Note for Surveillance in Article IV Consultations.
- As part of the ongoing CSR exercise, staff will:
  - assess implementation of the CSR 2021 surveillance priorities;
  - publish an updated guidance note in 2027.
- The updated guidance note will integrate relevant guidance for IMF surveillance including in new policy areas and seek to clarify key principles of engagement specified by the IEO such as macrocriticality, expertise, depth, frequency of engagement, and uniformity of treatment in newer policy areas (Box 1).
- Implementation sequencing and internal updates:
  - First phase: internal operational guidance to staff to consolidate and clarify assessment of macro-criticality, expertise, depth, frequency, and evenhandedness across new policy areas where guidance already exists.
    - Accountability: SPR with inputs from other departments by end-June 2025.
  - Second phase: publication of revised Staff Guidance Note for Surveillance in Article IV Consultations after the CSR.
    - Accountability: SPR with inputs from other departments by December 2027.

### Executive Board-Approved Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners
- Purpose: establish a coherent best-practice framework to anchor engagement with external partners, while retaining flexibility to address country-specific needs and operational challenges across surveillance, lending, and capacity development.
- Rationale and context:
  - Existing collaboration modalities vary by partner (e.g., Concordat and Guidance Notes with the World Bank; high-level agreements with WTO; staff-level arrangements with IDB).
  - Increasing need for collaboration with specialized organizations and NGOs as areas become recognized as macrocritical.
  - Board-approved strategies for climate and gender call explicitly for enhanced collaboration.
- Planned actions:
  - Stock take of existing agreements and formalized modalities across surveillance, lending, and capacity development to inform principles.
  - Drafting of high-level principles informed by Board-approved strategies and lessons from existing arrangements; envisaged coverage includes:
    - (i) rationale for the collaboration (e.g., results-oriented objectives that add value);
    - (ii) definition of the scope of collaboration, roles, and responsibilities;
    - (iii) need for consistency with Fund policies, existing arrangements with other institutions and general Fund Law;
    - (iv) mindfulness of resource implications;
    - (v) modalities for monitoring and review;
    - (vi) principles for communication and transparency.
  - Possible accompaniment by staff guidelines outlining consultation, review, and approval guidelines.
- Accountability and timeline:
  - SPR in consultation with LEG and other departments.
  - Submission of the high-level Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners to the Executive Board for approval (September 2025).

### Enterprise risk assessment and mitigants
- Key risks identified:
  - Reputational risk if IEO findings on the need for a more holistic approach when endorsing new policy areas are unaddressed, potentially undermining credibility and effectiveness.
  - Operational and business risks from misalignment between ambition of strategies and implementation, and from lack of adequate expertise impacting analytical accuracy.
- Current controls and proposed mitigants:
  - Fund’s review process and the proposed enhanced decision-making process for engagement in new policy areas (Recommendation 1) mitigate credibility and operational risks by aligning work with available resources.
  - Updating and publishing the surveillance guidance note after the 2026 CSR to strengthen staff’s ability to deliver high-quality policy advice.
  - Improved internal communication, streamlined Board Work Program, and reprioritization of activities to address work pressures.
  - Integration of budgetary and risk considerations, and an Executive Board-approved Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners to provide operational guidance.
- Overall assessment:
  - Enterprise risks associated with implementing the MIP actions are limited and lower than risks from inaction.
  - Inaction could undermine credibility (reputational risk) and increase operational risks through resource constraints affecting policy traction.
  - Potential reputational risks from recalibrating Board-approved commitments and potential business risks if the Fund fails to adapt products to evolving member needs; these can be mitigated through clear communication via the Board Work Program and Global Policy Agenda and continued collaboration with partners.
  - The 80th anniversary of the Bretton Woods institutions and the Fund for the Future workstream may offer opportunities for strategic communication.

### Resource implications
- Core plan leverages and strengthens existing workstreams; policy-related activities (e.g., guiding principles for surveillance prioritization in the CSR context) would be costed within the Board Work Program.
- Key steps require integrating strategic, budget, and enterprise risk assessments, supported by periodic strategic reviews and ongoing annual strategic dialogues, benefiting from work to strengthen budget data.
- Staff assessment: update of the 2022 Surveillance Guidance Note is part of an ongoing workstream and should not give rise to net new resource needs if proceeding as planned; staff will carefully assess how to rebalance activities within relevant workstreams.
- Nonetheless:
  - Strategy development and work in any additional policy area would likely require additional resources.
  - Translating CSR guidance on medium-term scope of engagement into operational strategies will imply related resourcing needs.
  - Development of high-level principles on engagement with partners is expected to require modest gross resources to be absorbed within the existing resource envelope, but potential additional engagement stemming from these principles will likely require additional resources due to coordination intensity.

### Implementation commitments, accountability, and timeline (selected)
- Management committed to a holistic and consultative decision-making approach (prioritization framework) to be further developed in the 2026 CSR with elements applied in the FY26 budget cycle and full implementation in FY27.
- OBP to report on progress against initiatives to strengthen budget data as part of the FY27-29 medium-term budget (by end-FY26).
- SPR with inputs from other departments:
  - Internal operational guidance update by end-June 2025.
  - Submission of high-level Statement of Principles for Engagement with Partners to Executive Board for approval (September 2025).
  - Publication of revised Staff Guidance Note for Surveillance in Article IV Consultations by December 2027.

*Source: Management Implementation Plan and accompanying text in the MIP on the IEO Evaluation of IMF’s Mandate.*

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/pp/2025/english/ppea2025018.pdf_