## Section I. Detailed Assessment and Recommendations

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [Section I. Detailed Assessment and Recommendations](https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/tar/2025/english/tarea2025060-print-pdf.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/files/publications/tar/2025/english/tarea2025060-print-pdf.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/files/publications/tar/2025/english/tarea2025060-print-pdf.pdf.json)

---

### Overall Assessment
- Objective: Assess the data quality of Zimbabwe’s public sector debt statistics (PSDS) against the IMF’s Data Quality Assessment Framework (DQAF) for Public Sector Debt Statistics (PSDS) 2024.
- Mission timing and inputs:
  - Mission from February 6 to 12, 2025.
  - Assessment based on information provided prior to and during the mission and publicly available information.
  - Agencies assessed: Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion (MoFEDIP) and Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ).
- Context and key metrics:
  - Latest IMF-World Bank DSA published in November 2024 found Zimbabwe’s debt unsustainable and in “external and overall debt distress”.
  - External arrears estimated at about US$7.3 billion.
  - Composition of external arrears: Paris Club creditors 55 percent; multilateral creditors 35 percent; non-Paris Club creditors about 9 percent.
  - Reported total public and publicly guaranteed (PPG) debt: US$21.2 billion or 97 percent of GDP at end-2023.
  - As at end-September 2024 domestically issued debt securities accounted for 24 percent of total PPG, up from 9 percent as at end-2022.
  - Of the recent increase in domestic debt, US$2.85 billion was on-lent to the Mutapa Investment Fund and used to settle legacy RBZ debts.
- Capacity development and technical assistance:
  - Significant STA support via the Data for Decision (D4D) Trust Fund (2019, 2021, 2023).
  - TA recommendations focused on broadening coverage and improving coverage, accuracy, and consistency of source data.
- Mission objective: Identify key strengths and areas for improvement in PSDS compilation and dissemination and recommend priority actions to enhance public debt data transparency.

### A. Prerequisites of Quality
Findings:
- Legal environment:
  - Public Debt Management Act [Chapter 22:21] of September 2015 assigns responsibility of public debt management to ZPDMO.
  - Act assigns compiling, verifying, and reporting public debt arrears (including domestic arrears to service providers), and monitoring and reporting implicit and explicit contingent liabilities.
  - ZPDMO functions audited annually by the Auditor-General and Report submitted to Parliament.
- Institutional environment:
  - ZPDMO organized with Front Office, Middle Office, and Back-Office; combined staff complement of around thirty.
  - Timetables for public debt reporting by MDAs and SOEs are established in law.
  - Monthly data on domestically issued debt securities received from RBZ.
  - Coordination among ZPDMO, RBZ, and Accountant General Directorate (AGD) described as excellent.
  - External and Domestic Debt Management Committee (EDDC) approves government guarantees for Parliament endorsement.
- Systems and resources:
  - DMFAS is outdated (last revised in 2021) and needs upgrade to DMFAS 7 to handle a broader range of instruments (including accounts payables) and interface with other systems for efficient data exchange.
  - ZPDMO has elaborate internal procedures for data production and publication that include exclusion of unverified Auditor-General claims from reported domestic debt arrears to service providers.
- User engagement:
  - Relevance and utility of PSDS monitored but could be expanded to a wider user community.

Priority recommendations:
- Upgrade DMFAS to DMFAS 7 to expand instrument coverage and enable system interfaces.
- Expand engagement and monitoring of user needs beyond current user community.
- Conduct periodic user surveys to gauge the relevance and practical utility of PSDS in meeting users’ needs.

### B. Assurances of Integrity
Findings:
- Impartial production:
  - PSDS are produced on an impartial basis; staff professional independence is recognized and practiced.
  - Of seven Back-office officers, three are certified accountants and three are in the process of certification.
  - Public debt statistics are reviewed and validated before publication.
- Transparency and staff conduct:
  - Conceptual and methodological approaches driven by tools embedded in DMFAS and aligned with PSDSG 2013.
  - ZPDMO can publicly explain technical aspects and respond to misinterpretations, including issues flagged by the Auditor General.
  - Staff must swear annually to abide by the Official Secrets Act and take the Integrity Pledge.
- Decision drivers:
  - Choices of sources and dissemination decisions are guided mainly by legal requirements.
  - Staff are in practice free from political or other undue influence when compiling PSDS.
- Disclosure:
  - Terms and conditions for collection, processing, and dissemination are disclosed and referenced in ZPDMO publications.
  - Guidelines for staff behavior are in place to ensure conduct that preserves public credibility.

Priority recommendations:
- Maintain and continue to safeguard professional independence and transparent disclosure practices.
- Announce in advance any substantive change in source data and/or methodology used in the public debt reports.
- List individuals (agencies) that have access to public debt statistics prior to their release.

### C. Methodological Soundness
Findings:
- Coverage and reporting:
  - Reported PSDS cover all loans and debt securities of the budgetary central government (BCG), partial information on BCG accounts payable, and debts of the RBZ which the Government is servicing and settling.
  - Supplemental information provided on outstanding government guarantees; PSDS reported by creditor, currency, residency, and maturity.
- Deviations from international standards:
  - Face value rather than preferred nominal value is used to record stocks of debt securities.
  - Residency principle for identifying external debt not always strictly applied; assumptions used when necessary information unavailable.
  - Some terminology (e.g., “debt assumptions”) does not fully accord with statistical standards.
- Coverage gaps:
  - Need to expand sector and instrument coverage beyond BCG and Central Bank to include local governments, public corporations, debts from SDR allocations, other accounts payable, pensions, and currency and deposits.
  - Suggested initial inclusion: debts of local governments and from SDR allocations where comprehensive and timely quarterly data appear available.
- Consolidation caution:
  - As PSDS coverage expands, care is required to consolidate data to avoid double counting of liabilities.

Priority recommendations:
- Transition valuation of debt securities from face value to nominal value consistent with standards.
- Apply residency principle consistently; document and minimize use of assumptions.
- Expand coverage to include local governments, public corporations, SDR allocations, other accounts payable, pensions, and currency and deposits—starting with local governments and SDR allocations where data permit.
- Implement consolidation procedures to prevent double counting as coverage expands.
- Include tables presenting PSDS by instrument as defined in international statistical standards.
- Include liabilities related to the IMF SDR allocations within public debt reports.

### D. Accuracy and Reliability
Findings:
- Validation and audit:
  - Source data on external loans and domestically issued debt securities subject to extensive validation; reported data found accurate and reliable.
  - Office of the Auditor General audits public debt statements—provides strong quality assurance through identification of issues and discrepancies.
- System integration risks:
  - Lack of system integration presents future risks to data quality.
  - Recommended automated interfaces:
    - DMFAS <-> IFMIS to facilitate payments related to debt servicing.
    - DMFAS <-> RBZ Central Securities Depository (CSD) to facilitate issuing and managing debt securities.
  - Benefits of automation: increase efficiency and reduce process risks.
  - Procuring DMFAS 7 is important because it includes web services for interfacing systems and improvements for statistical reporting (e.g., reporting other accounts payable and contingent liabilities).
- Data gaps and reconciliation:
  - Some instruments not held in DMFAS: penalties on external loans in arrears, RBZ liabilities being serviced and settled by Treasury, domestic arrears to service providers, and the compensation obligation to former farm owners.
  - For external loans, information in DMFAS is reconciled with the creditor on at least an annual basis.
  - For domestically issued debt securities, outstanding stocks and related flows are validated against the RBZ CSD on a monthly cycle.
  - World Bank DRS reporting improved but penalties and RBZ liabilities assumed by Treasury are not currently reported to the DRS.
  - Latest audited statement available at mission time was from 2020; OAG expected to have audited statements for 2021 and 2022 by end-March 2025.
- Availability of data for other accounts payable:
  - MDAs: MoFEDIP systematically collecting data on expenditure arrears as part of Arrears Clearance and Debt Resolution process; MDAs expected to begin IPSAS-based accrual accounting in 2025.
  - Local councils: submit quarterly management reports to Ministry of Local Government and Public Works within 1 to 2 months of the end of the quarter, containing outstanding stocks of all forms of debt including trade payables.
  - Mission not made aware of similar quarterly reporting requirements for public corporations.
- Mission judgement: good quality and timely quarterly data available for debts of local authorities (non-guaranteed loans, borrowing facilities, and trade payables) that could be incorporated in ZPDMO reporting before further expansion.

Priority recommendations:
- Procure and implement DMFAS 7 to enable system interfaces and improved statistical reporting.
- Develop and implement automated data flows between DMFAS and IFMIS, and between DMFAS and RBZ CSD.
- Strengthen system integration to reduce manual risks and improve timeliness/accuracy.
- Use available quarterly data on non-guaranteed debt of local authorities to expand sector coverage.
- Submit to the DRS penalties by individual loan and supplemental information on RBZ liabilities serviced and settled by the Treasury.
- Review and publish materiality of liabilities related to PPPs and finance leases.
- Periodically analyze revisions to understand drivers and inform PSDS compilation procedures.

### E. Serviceability
Findings:
- Frequency, timeliness, and improvements:
  - Since 2018 annual public debt bulletins published; in June 2024 quarterly debt bulletins introduced.
  - Quarterly bulletins published within three months of the end of the quarter.
  - Regularity and frequency align with best practices, but lack of a pre-announced release calendar is a shortcoming.
- Content and user value:
  - Debt data show good consistency with other debt publications and wider macroeconomic statistics.
  - Detailed instrument-level debt tables and long external/domestic time series from 1980 are valuable.
  - Users would benefit from shorter time series for other component debt aggregates to contextualize latest positions.
  - Publication of reconciliations between opening and closing debt stocks and flows would add value.
- Revisions and metadata:
  - Anticipated increase in revisions with quarterly data—need a formal revision policy to guide highlighting and explaining revisions.
  - Annual central government debt data on Zimbabwe’s NSDP should be updated and associated metadata maintained.

Priority recommendations:
- Develop and publish a pre-announced release calendar for PSDS publications.
- Provide shorter time series for component aggregates alongside long series.
- Publish reconciliations between opening and closing debt stocks and the flows explaining changes.
- Adopt and publish a formal revision policy.
- Update and maintain central government debt data and metadata on the National Summary Data Page (NSDP).

### F. Accessibility
Findings:
- Presentation and metadata:
  - Commentary, tables, and charts in public debt reports are well considered and useful to diverse users.
  - Metadata is insufficient in several areas:
    - No information on valuation used when reporting Treasury bills and bonds.
    - Little information on coverage of debt bulletins by public entities and instruments.
    - No explanations of concepts such as public and publicly guaranteed debt and external or domestic debt.
- Data formats and dissemination:
  - Data currently disseminated in pdf format; need to provide machine-readable formats (Excel, csv, SDMX) to support analysis and re-dissemination.
  - Consider dissemination via the National Summary Data Page (NSDP) of the e-GDDS and the Joint IMF-World Bank Quarterly Public Sector Debt statistics database (QPSD).
- User engagement:
  - Collaboration with Zimbabwe Coalition on Debt and Development (ZIMCODD) is welcomed and should be maintained and strengthened.
  - Outside that partnership, ZPDMO could do more to promote and encourage comments, queries, and requests from users to inform improvements.

Priority recommendations:
- Expand metadata in debt reports to include valuation methods for Treasury bills and bonds, coverage definitions, and explanations of key concepts.
- Disseminate PSDS in machine-readable formats (Excel, csv, SDMX) in addition to pdf.
- Disseminate PSDS via NSDP and the QPSD.
- Strengthen outreach beyond ZIMCODD to solicit wider user feedback.

### Timeliness, frequency, and dissemination details
Findings:
- Annual debt reports published since 2018; the last report for 2023 published within six months of the end of the year.
- A statement of public debt as at the end of September is produced for budget documents and placed before Parliament before the end of November each year.
- Quarterly debt reports introduced in June 2024; two had been published at mission time:
  - First quarterly report published within three months of the end of the period.
  - Second quarterly report published within two months of the end of the period.
- Quarterly Treasury bulletins include a summary table on the PPG debt stock at the end of the quarter and monthly debt servicing payments, published within three months of the end of the quarter.
- No release calendar is published; recommended to pre-announce publication dates.
- Historical time series:
  - Annual reports include series back to 1980 for external debt (in US dollars) and domestic debt (in Zimbabwe dollars).
  - No long time series available for total public debt or for further breakdowns (e.g., external debt by bilateral and multilateral creditors).
- Revisions practice:
  - No formal published PSDS revision policy; quarterly reports flag data as “preliminary pending finalization of the validation and reconciliation process” but do not explain reasons for revisions.
  - Example revision: 2022 external debt revised from USD$12,827 million to USD$12,800 million between the 2022 and 2023 publications; revision not highlighted nor reason explained.
- Consistency and coordination:
  - Macroeconomic Consistent Framework Working Group meets three to four times a year including MoFEDIP, RBZ, and ZimStat.
  - Good consistency observed across publications; small differences noted and exchange rate fluctuations explain many differences.
- NSDP dissemination:
  - NSDP currently disseminates annual central government gross debt for 2019-2021; ZPDMO encouraged to extend to 2023 and maintain the series.
- Metadata:
  - Some DQAF metadata exists on the IMF DSBB but was last updated in 2013 and needs review.
  - Public debt reports include limited metadata; recommend more summary metadata in reports.
- Data formats:
  - Majority of public debt data only available in pdf; recommend providing MS Excel, csv, SDMX.
  - Recommend disseminating quarterly PSDS through the Joint IMF-World Bank QPSD.

Recommendations (timeliness & dissemination):
- Publish a release calendar and disseminate per the calendar.
- Include tables showing recent evolution of public debt by component and drivers of changes.
- Regularly update NSDP data and metadata.
- Develop, publish, and apply a PSDS revision policy.
- Provide comprehensive and accessible metadata within public debt reports.
- Disseminate data in manipulable formats and via the QPSD.
- Promote an on-request user service and proactive outreach (workshops, events, surveys).

### Survey and standardized reporting observations
- Stakeholder survey responses highlight concerns on coverage of local government, public corporations, arrears, pension liabilities, and valuation approaches.
- Standardized templates suggested:
  - Table A1: Standardized Quarterly Debt Reporting Table (by maturity and type of instrument; by currency; by residence; by interest rate type; memoranda items including SDRs and other accounts payable).
  - Table A2: Reconciliation between Public Sector Debt Flows and Stocks (opening balance; CHANGES DURING THE PERIOD; closing balance; transactions; other economic flows; revaluations; other volume changes; principal; interest).

Authorities' response:
- "The Zimbabwe authorities accepted the findings and recommendations detailed in this report with no additional comments."

*IMF | Technical Report – Zimbabwe Data Quality Assessment for Public Sector Debt Statistics (Section I).*

### Section I. Detailed Assessment and Recommendations .....................................................................

### Section I. Detailed Assessment and Recommendations

### Overall Assessment
- Objective: Assess the data quality of Zimbabwe’s public sector debt statistics (PSDS) against the IMF’s Data Quality Assessment Framework (DQAF) for Public Sector Debt Statistics (PSDS) 2024.
- Mission timing and inputs:
  - Mission from February 6 to 12, 2025.
  - Assessment based on information provided prior to and during the mission and publicly available information.
  - Agencies assessed: Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion (MoFEDIP) and Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ).
- Context and key metrics:
  - Latest IMF-World Bank DSA published in November 2024 found Zimbabwe’s debt unsustainable and in “external and overall debt distress”.
  - External arrears estimated at about US$7.3 billion.
  - Composition of external arrears: Paris Club creditors 55 percent; multilateral creditors 35 percent; non-Paris Club creditors about 9 percent.
  - Reported total public and publicly guaranteed (PPG) debt: US$21.2 billion or 97 percent of GDP at end-2023.
  - As at end-September 2024 domestically issued debt securities accounted for 24 percent of total PPG, up from 9 percent as at end-2022.
  - Of the recent increase in domestic debt, US$2.85 billion was on-lent to the Mutapa Investment Fund and used to settle legacy RBZ debts.
- Capacity development and technical assistance:
  - Significant STA support via the Data for Decision (D4D) Trust Fund (2019, 2021, 2023).
  - TA recommendations focused on broadening coverage and improving coverage, accuracy, and consistency of source data.
- Mission objective: Identify key strengths and areas for improvement in PSDS compilation and dissemination and recommend priority actions to enhance public debt data transparency.

### A. Prerequisites of Quality
Findings:
- Legal environment:
  - Public Debt Management Act [Chapter 22:21] of September 2015 assigns responsibility of public debt management to ZPDMO.
  - Act assigns compiling, verifying, and reporting public debt arrears (including domestic arrears to service providers), and monitoring and reporting implicit and explicit contingent liabilities.
  - ZPDMO functions audited annually by the Auditor-General and Report submitted to Parliament.
- Institutional environment:
  - ZPDMO organized with Front Office, Middle Office, and Back-Office; combined staff complement of around thirty.
  - Timetables for public debt reporting by MDAs and SOEs are established in law.
  - Monthly data on domestically issued debt securities received from RBZ.
  - Coordination among ZPDMO, RBZ, and Accountant General Directorate (AGD) described as excellent.
  - External and Domestic Debt Management Committee (EDDC) approves government guarantees for Parliament endorsement.
- Systems and resources:
  - DMFAS is outdated (last revised in 2021) and needs upgrade to DMFAS 7 to handle a broader range of instruments (including accounts payables) and interface with other systems for efficient data exchange.
  - ZPDMO has elaborate internal procedures for data production and publication that include exclusion of unverified Auditor-General claims from reported domestic debt arrears to service providers.
- User engagement:
  - Relevance and utility of PSDS monitored but could be expanded to a wider user community.

Priority recommendations (implicit in findings):
- Upgrade DMFAS to DMFAS 7 to expand instrument coverage and enable system interfaces.
- Expand engagement and monitoring of user needs beyond current user community.

### B. Assurances of Integrity
Findings:
- Impartial production:
  - PSDS are produced on an impartial basis; staff professional independence is recognized and practiced.
  - Of seven Back-office officers, three are certified accountants and three are in the process of certification.
  - Public debt statistics are reviewed and validated before publication.
- Transparency and staff conduct:
  - Conceptual and methodological approaches driven by tools embedded in DMFAS and aligned with PSDSG 2013.
  - ZPDMO can publicly explain technical aspects and respond to misinterpretations, including issues flagged by the Auditor General.
  - Staff must swear annually to abide by the Official Secrets Act and take the Integrity Pledge.
- Decision drivers:
  - Choices of sources and dissemination decisions are guided mainly by legal requirements.
  - Staff are in practice free from political or other undue influence when compiling PSDS.
- Disclosure:
  - Terms and conditions for collection, processing, and dissemination are disclosed and referenced in ZPDMO publications.
  - Guidelines for staff behavior are in place to ensure conduct that preserves public credibility.

Priority recommendations (implicit in findings):
- Maintain and continue to safeguard professional independence and transparent disclosure practices.

### C. Methodological Soundness
Findings:
- Coverage and reporting:
  - Reported PSDS cover all loans and debt securities of the budgetary central government (BCG), partial information on BCG accounts payable, and debts of the RBZ which the Government is servicing and settling.
  - Supplemental information provided on outstanding government guarantees; PSDS reported by creditor, currency, residency, and maturity.
- Deviations from international standards:
  - Face value rather than preferred nominal value is used to record stocks of debt securities.
  - Residency principle for identifying external debt not always strictly applied; assumptions used when necessary information unavailable.
  - Some terminology (e.g., “debt assumptions”) does not fully accord with statistical standards.
- Coverage gaps:
  - Need to expand sector and instrument coverage beyond BCG and Central Bank to include local governments, public corporations, debts from SDR allocations, other accounts payable, pensions, and currency and deposits.
  - Suggested initial inclusion: debts of local governments and from SDR allocations where comprehensive and timely quarterly data appear available.
- Consolidation caution:
  - As PSDS coverage expands, care is required to consolidate data to avoid double counting of liabilities.

Priority recommendations:
- Transition valuation of debt securities from face value to nominal value consistent with standards.
- Apply residency principle consistently; document and minimize use of assumptions.
- Expand coverage to include local governments, public corporations, SDR allocations, other accounts payable, pensions, and currency and deposits—starting with local governments and SDR allocations where data permit.
- Implement consolidation procedures to prevent double counting as coverage expands.

### D. Accuracy and Reliability
Findings:
- Validation and audit:
  - Source data on external loans and domestically issued debt securities subject to extensive validation; reported data found accurate and reliable.
  - Office of the Auditor General audits public debt statements—provides strong quality assurance through identification of issues and discrepancies.
- System integration risks:
  - Lack of system integration presents future risks to data quality.
  - Recommended automated interfaces:
    - DMFAS <-> IFMIS to facilitate payments related to debt servicing.
    - DMFAS <-> RBZ Central Securities Depository (CSD) to facilitate issuing and managing debt securities.
  - Benefits of automation: increase efficiency and reduce process risks.
  - Procuring DMFAS 7 is important because it includes web services for interfacing systems and improvements for statistical reporting (e.g., reporting other accounts payable and contingent liabilities).

Priority recommendations:
- Procure and implement DMFAS 7 to enable system interfaces and improved statistical reporting.
- Develop and implement automated data flows between DMFAS and IFMIS, and between DMFAS and RBZ CSD.
- Strengthen system integration to reduce manual risks and improve timeliness/accuracy.

### E. Serviceability
Findings:
- Frequency, timeliness, and improvements:
  - Since 2018 annual public debt bulletins published; in June 2024 quarterly debt bulletins introduced.
  - Quarterly bulletins published within three months of the end of the quarter.
  - Regularity and frequency align with best practices, but lack of a pre-announced release calendar is a shortcoming.
- Content and user value:
  - Debt data show good consistency with other debt publications and wider macroeconomic statistics.
  - Detailed instrument-level debt tables and long external/domestic time series from 1980 are valuable.
  - Users would benefit from shorter time series for other component debt aggregates to contextualize latest positions.
  - Publication of reconciliations between opening and closing debt stocks and flows would add value.
- Revisions and metadata:
  - Anticipated increase in revisions with quarterly data—need a formal revision policy to guide highlighting and explaining revisions.
  - Annual central government debt data on Zimbabwe’s NSDP should be updated and associated metadata maintained.

Priority recommendations:
- Develop and publish a pre-announced release calendar for PSDS publications.
- Provide shorter time series for component aggregates alongside long series.
- Publish reconciliations between opening and closing debt stocks and the flows explaining changes.
- Adopt and publish a formal revision policy.
- Update and maintain central government debt data and metadata on the National Summary Data Page (NSDP).

### F. Accessibility
Findings:
- Presentation and metadata:
  - Commentary, tables, and charts in public debt reports are well considered and useful to diverse users.
  - Metadata is insufficient in several areas:
    - No information on valuation used when reporting Treasury bills and bonds.
    - Little information on coverage of debt bulletins by public entities and instruments.
    - No explanations of concepts such as public and publicly guaranteed debt and external or domestic debt.
- Data formats and dissemination:
  - Data currently disseminated in pdf format; need to provide machine-readable formats (Excel, csv, SDMX) to support analysis and re-dissemination.
  - Consider dissemination via the National Summary Data Page (NSDP) of the e-GDDS and the Joint IMF-World Bank Quarterly Public Sector Debt statistics database (QPSD).
- User engagement:
  - Collaboration with Zimbabwe Coalition on Debt and Development (ZIMCODD) is welcomed and should be maintained and strengthened.
  - Outside that partnership, ZPDMO could do more to promote and encourage comments, queries, and requests from users to inform improvements.

Priority recommendations:
- Expand metadata in debt reports to include valuation methods for Treasury bills and bonds, coverage definitions, and explanations of key concepts.
- Disseminate PSDS in machine-readable formats (Excel, csv, SDMX) in addition to pdf.
- Disseminate PSDS via NSDP and the QPSD.
- Strengthen outreach beyond ZIMCODD to solicit wider user feedback.

*IMF | Technical Report – Zimbabwe Data Quality Assessment for Public Sector Debt Statistics (Section I).*

### 0. Prerequisites of quality

### 0. Prerequisites of quality

### 0.1 Legal and institutional environment
- The responsibility for collecting, processing, and disseminating public debt statistics in Zimbabwe is clearly specified and well established in the law.
- The Public Debt Management Act [Chapter 22:21] of September 2015 (PDM Act) assigns responsibility to the ZPDMO of the MoFEDIP and requires ZPDMO to:
  - "Keep timely, comprehensive and accurate records of outstanding public debt, guarantees and onlending, in a computerized database, and in particular—
    (i) compile data on all debt servicing obligations of the Government, local authorities, and public entities, and prepare and publish debt statistical bulletins in relation thereto regularly, either globally or on a selective basis as required
    (ii) validate and reconcile debt data concerning creditors of the Government of Zimbabwe;"
- The PDM Act also assigns responsibility for compiling, verifying, and reporting public debt arrears (including domestic arrears to service providers), and monitoring and reporting implicit and explicit public sector contingent liabilities.
- ZPDMO is organized into three sections (Front Office, Middle Office, Back-Office) with a combined staff compliment of around thirty; core data collection, processing, and validation is performed by the Back-Office with seven graduate staff, several certified public accountants.
- Data sharing and coordination among data-producing agencies (notably AGD and RBZ) are adequate; timetables for public debt reporting by MDAs and SOEs are established in law, and there are clear arrangements and timetables for monthly data exchange for domestically issued debt securities between ZPDMO, AGD, and RBZ.
- Individual reporters’ data are kept confidential and used for statistical purposes only; debt securities data are provided in aggregated form. Assumed debt and guarantees must be disclosed to Parliament and published under the law.
- Public debt reporting is mandated by the Constitution (Section 300 (4a)) and PDM Act (Section 36 (1)), requiring MoFEDIP to report to Parliament at least twice a year; the law specifies monthly reporting of detailed information (PDM Act, Section 30). Compliance gaps exist: Section 22 (5) requires guaranteed borrowing to be reported no later than 10 working days after loan agreement signature or drawdown, but this is not observed. The 2022 Auditor General’s Report found many local authorities and public entities not complying with audit submission requirements, with lags as far back as 2018.

### 0.2 Resources
- Staff, facilities, and financing are commensurate with ZPDMO work programs, but computing resources need enhancement.
- The current DMFAS (DMFAS 6.1) is outdated:
  - Cannot easily handle specific debt instruments (e.g., accounts payables) to provide an overall public debt portfolio.
  - Functionalities are limited for computing debt transactions as per international standards.
- Urgent need to implement DMFAS 7 to:
  - allow effective capturing of new debt terms;
  - interface with other systems such as RBZ’s CSD;
  - enhance efficiency in data sharing.
- MoFEDIP has obtained funding from the African Development Bank to secure and implement DMFAS 7; interim upgrade to DMFAS 6.2 is in process.
- Recommendation (from summary table): Procure DMFAS 7 and develop plans to interface DMFAS with the IFMIS system (to automate debt payments) and the CSD (to automate flows of data on debt securities) to make the flow of data more efficient.

### 0.3 Relevance
- Practice largely observed (LO): The relevance and practical utility of PSDS in meeting users’ needs are monitored but could be expanded to the wider user community.
- ZPDMO publishes multiple reports: Annual Debt Bulletin, Quarterly Public Debt Report (introduced June 2024), and monthly debt reports; supplies data to IMF and World Bank (DRS); inputs external debt data for RBZ balance of payments; supports Medium-Term Debt Strategy and Debt Sustainability Analysis.
- ZPDMO does not conduct periodic user surveys to assess adequacy of published data.
- ZIMCODD has commended ZPDMO: "its public debt reports are timely, comprehensive, and facilitate further simplification (by ZIMCODD) for layman’s understanding what the growing size of public debt implies".
- Priority recommendation: Conduct periodic user surveys to gauge the relevance and practical utility of PSDS in meeting users’ needs.

### 0.4 Other quality management
- Processes are in place to focus on quality of PSDS; ZPDMO management promotes accuracy and reliability in routine work programs.
- Validation and reconciliation practices: ZPDMO validates and reconciles debt data concerning the Government of Zimbabwe including on all public debt arrears.
- Transaction verification procedure: three stages—initiating officer prepares the claim; senior officer cross-checks; Director of Back-office approves and clears the claim for processing and record.
- Staff training programs emphasize quality; data compiling officers have access to DMFAS system quality controls and expert guidance from UNCTAD in Geneva.
- The IMF technical assistance mission of March 2023 enhanced coverage of public debt (local authorities, SOEs, public debt arrears). Treasury Budget Circular (2024 Budget Call Circular) requires periodic reporting of debt as a prerequisite for issuance of borrowing certificates and Government Guarantees.
- Trade-offs between quality and coverage are considered; unverified Auditor General claims are excluded from reported public debt on domestic arrears to service providers.

### Strengths
- Strong legal framework for public debt management (including collection and dissemination of debt data).
- Strong institutional arrangements for public debt management.

### Recommendations for improvements
- Urgently implement the latest version of the DMFAS system (DMFAS 7) to:
  - allow effective capturing of new debt terms,
  - facilitate full compliance with international standards,
  - interface with other systems to enhance efficiency in data sharing.
- Conduct periodic user surveys to gauge the relevance and practical utility of PSDS in meeting users’ needs.

*Source: 0. Prerequisites of quality — IMF Technical Report – Zimbabwe Data Quality Assessment for Public Sector Debt Statistics*

### 24. Public sector debt statistics are produced on an impartial basis. ZPDMO recognizes the

### 24. Public sector debt statistics are produced on an impartial basis. ZPDMO recognizes the

### Impartiality, professional independence, and staff conduct
- Of the seven officers of the Back-office, three are certified accountants, and three are in the process of certification.  
- PSDS are carefully reviewed and validated before they are cleared for publication and dissemination, to protect the professional independence and good reputation of the ZPDMO.  
- Choices of sources of data as well as decisions about dissemination are informed mainly by the need to comply with the law. ZPDMO staff are, in practice, free from political, or other influence, in choosing the most appropriate sources and methods for compiling public debt statistics that must meet the requirement set in the law.  
- ZPDMO has clear Guidelines for staff behavior which are well known to the staff. All staff must swear every year to abide with the Official Secrets Act and take the Integrity Pledge. ZPDMO has developed General Guidelines for staff and a Procedures Manual for the Back Office staff to guide them on routine DMFAS operations.  
Strengths:
- High level of professionalism in the collection, processing, and dissemination of public debt statistics.  
- High level of transparency in disclosure public debt information far exceeding comparable countries in the region.  
- Strong ethical standards.  
Recommendations for improvements:
- Announce in advance any substantive change in source data and/or methodology used in the public debt reports.  
- List individuals (agencies) that have access to public debt statistics prior to their release.

### Legal and institutional framework for data sources, dissemination, and queries
- The choice of data sources and methods of compilation and verification is driven mainly by accounting principles. Information from other Government departments such as data on state-owned enterprises, and accounts payables are provided under internal data sharing arrangements facilitated by the OAG.  
- Regarding domestic debt, while there is no signed Memorandum of Understanding between ZPDMO and RBZ, data is shared freely monthly.  
- Consideration of statistical concepts and methodologies is largely driven by the tools embedded in the DMFAS software that allow application of international statistical standards in PSDSG 2013.  
- Disclosure of information is embedded in the law and implemented with rigor by ZPDMO through internal staff guidelines and written procedures.  
- ZPDMO is allowed to explain technical aspects of public debt statistics contained in its publications. However, all queries must be channeled through the Secretary to the Treasury. Regarding questions emerging from the Parliament, the OAG collates the responses and transmits them to Parliament on behalf of the Minister. ZPDMO arranges meetings with key stake orders to explain its position on issues flagged by the Auditor General in the Annual Report to Parliament.  
- The terms and conditions under which public debt statistics are collected, processed, and disseminated are referenced in all ZPDMO publications. Zimbabwe’s public debt is compiled and published in compliance with the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No.20) of 2013, Act 1of 2013) Section 300 (4a+4b) and the PDM Act [chapter 22:21], Sections 30 and 36. ZPDMO publications provide specific reference to the law under which PSDS are produced.
- Under section 300 of the Constitution, “The Minister responsible for finance must— (a) at least twice a year, report to parliament on the performance of – (i) loans raised by the State; and (ii) loans guaranteed by the State; (b) at the same time as the estimates of revenue and expenditure are laid before the National Assembly in terms of Section 305, of the Constitution of Zimbabwe table in Parliament a comprehensive statement of the public debt of Zimbabwe.”  
- Under the PDM Act [chapter 22:21], Section 30, ZDMO is required to prepare monthly, quarterly, and annual reports on loan and guarantees with strict deadlines. The reports must be submitted to the Secretary of Finance and Accountant -General “within thirty days of the respective month, quarter, or year concerned” and subsequently laid before the National Assembly at least bi-annually by the Minister “within sixty days at the end of the period concerned.” PDM Act specifies information that should be included in the reports which in turn dictates the work program of the ZPDMO—specifically the Middle and Back Office.  
- The granularity of debt information disclosed by Zimbabwe in its public debt publications far exceed the norm in many countries. ZIMCODD acknowledged with great appreciation the major strides made by ZPDMO in the last few years in enhancing debt transparency and its communication.

### Internal access, pre-release handling, and recommended practices
- Internal governmental access to statistics prior to their release is not publicly identified. The autonomy that the ZPDMO enjoys guarantees that its statistics are not disclosed until they have been tabled in Parliament by the Minister of Finance as per the Constitution and PDM Act. Other than the relevant senior officials of MoFEDIP, no government unit or public servant is expected to have access to the public debt data before they are officially published.  
- Public debt statistics disseminated by ZPDMO are labeled as its products and as the primary source of the data. The mission could not obtain any evidence that ZPDMO identifies individuals that have access to public debt statistics prior to release nor any changes in methodology or source data in advance of publication.  
- Recommended good practice: substantive change in source data and/or methodology should be announced in advance.

### Methodological soundness: coverage, valuation, and presentation
- Public debt reporting for Zimbabwe can be broadly characterized as the debt liabilities of the BCG and central bank borrowing. The reported gross debt captures outstanding noncontingent contractual liabilities. Zimbabwe public debt principally includes liabilities in the form of loans and debt securities, although specific other accounts payables are also captured.  
- The reporting of external loans is at nominal value as recommended in the PSDSG 2013. This valuation is driven by nearly all loans being in long term arrears. The public debt reports separately report principal arrears, interest arrears and arrear penalties.  
- Domestically issued debt statistics are reported using the face valuation (redemption value) which is not the preferred valuation. The PSDS DQAF highlights that debt securities should ideally be captured at nominal value, with the market value included as a memorandum item. Although this practice is not followed in Zimbabwe, it is not unusual in the region to find debt securities only valued at face value.  
- The distinction between external and domestic debt is based on the residency principle of the statistical manuals, although with some simplifying assumptions. Some elements of debt reported as “domestic debt” may actually be external debt (for example, liabilities to former farmers under the Global Compensation Deed if farmers are no longer resident; domestically issued debt securities held by nonresidents).  
- Public debt reports break down PSDS using standard concepts found in the statistical standards, including reporting debt by creditor type, currency, original maturity and remaining maturity, and disaggregations such as external debt by interest rate type.  
- Coverage gaps: non-guaranteed debts of local governments, extrabudgetary units and public corporations, and debts of social security funds are currently not reported.  
- Instrument gaps: liabilities related to the allocation of special drawing rights (SDRs), pension related liabilities, additional other accounts payable beyond compensation for former farm owners and identified domestic arrears to service providers, and potential liabilities related to financial leases and public private partnerships (PPPs) are not fully captured.  
- Terminology divergence: Zimbabwe uses the term “public and publicly guaranteed debt” for headline metrics, but called guarantees are treated as debt (not contingent liabilities) in practice; contingent liabilities are excluded from headline totals and provided as supplementary information.  
- Use of term “debt assumption” differs: Treasury “assumed” RBZ liabilities in 2015, 2021 and 2023 in local reporting, but mission understood liabilities remain on the RBZ balance sheet with Treasury obliged to provide funds for RBZ to service and settle these debts; recording at the public sector level remains the same though these debts remain debts of RBZ and not the central government.

Strengths:
- Published debt reports broadly follow the concepts and definitions of the international statistical standards.  
- Valuation of loans is in accordance with statistical standards (although debt securities are recorded at face value which is not the preferred valuation).  
Recommendations for improvements:
- Include tables in the public debt reports which present the PSDS by instrument, as defined in the international statistical standards.  
- Include liabilities related to the IMF SDR allocations within the public debt reports.  
- Strictly apply the residency principle when distinguishing between domestic and external debt.  
- Expand the sector coverage of the public debt reports to include direct non-guaranteed borrowing of public units outside the budgetary central government.  
- As the sector coverage is extended, apply the statistical principle of consolidation so as not to double count any liabilities.

### Accuracy and reliability: systems, validation, audits, and data expansion
- Source data on external loans and domestically issued debt securities are held in the Debt Management Financial Analysis System (DMFAS) and are subject to extensive validation. DMFAS is purchased from and supported by UNCTAD.  
- For external loans, information on each loan in DMFAS is reconciled with the creditor on at least an annual basis.  
- For domestically issued debt securities, outstanding stocks and related flows are validated against the RBZ Central Securities Depository (CSD) on a monthly cycle.  
- The World Bank’s Debtor Reporting System (DRS) notes that Zimbabwe’s reporting of the external public debt to the DRS has improved significantly; cross-checks and validations by the World Bank have narrowed discrepancies in BCG external debt stock positions between ZPDMO and DRS. However, penalties and RBZ liabilities assumed by Treasury are not currently reported to the DRS and this data gap needs addressing.  
- Some public debt instruments and positions are not held in DMFAS: penalties on external loans in arrears, RBZ liabilities being serviced and settled by Treasury, domestic arrears to service providers, and the compensation obligation to former farm owners. This complicates validation.  
- Validation processes are complicated by lack of system integration: example workflow for debt security maturity settlement involves off-system instructions between DMFAS, AGD, IFMIS, RBZ, and CSD, creating inefficiencies and potential for errors.  
- DMFAS 7 introduces functionality that could mitigate challenges: (i) web services to allow integration of DMFAS with other systems such as IFMIS and CSD, (ii) forms to capture and report “non-traditional” instruments including SDR allocation liabilities, and (iii) improvements in the capturing of contingent liabilities. Procuring DMFAS 7 could remove or mitigate several challenges.  
- Statements of public debt and contingent liabilities are audited annually by the OAG. Audits are discussed with ZPDMO and shared with Parliament’s Public Account Committee and published. At the time of the mission the latest audited statement was from 2020; the OAG expected to have audited the statements for 2021 and 2022 by end-March 2025.  
- Availability of data for other accounts payable: MoFEDIP has begun systematically collecting data on expenditure arrears of the MDAs as part of the Arrears Clearance and Debt Resolution process; MDAs are expected to begin IPSAS-based accrual accounting in 2025. Local councils submit quarterly management reports to the Ministry of Local Government and Public Works, within 1 to 2 months of the end of the quarter, which contain outstanding stocks of all forms of debt including trade payables. The mission was not made aware of similar quarterly reporting requirements for public corporations.  
- Mission recommendation: review available data from MDAs, local authorities and public corporations to develop a strategy for expanding debt coverage to include both other accounts payable and direct non-guaranteed borrowing. The mission judged there is good quality and timely quarterly data available for the debts of local authorities (non-guaranteed loans, borrowing facilities, and trade payables) that could be incorporated in ZPDMO reporting before further expansion.

Strengths:
- Data on external loans is validated at least annually with creditors.  
- Data for domestically issued debt securities is reconciled with the AGD and the RBZ, and any differences are investigated and resolved.  
- The statements of debt and contingent liability are subject to annual audits by the OAG with the results of those audits presented to Parliament.  
- Due to robust controls on borrowing within the public sector, good data sources are available on non-guaranteed borrowing by public entities which could be used to expand the public debt reporting.

Recommendations for improvements:
- Use available quarterly data on the non-guaranteed debt (including trade payables) of local authorities to expand the sector coverage of public debt reports.  
- Explore how to best use the available data on expenditure arrears (MDAs) and accounts payable (local governments and public corporations) to expand the debt instrument coverage of the public debt reports.  
- Once DMFAS 7 is procured, develop plans to interface DMFAS with the IFMIS system (to automate debt payments) and the CSD (to automate flows of data on debt securities) in order to make the flow of data more efficient.  
- Submit to the DRS penalties by individual loan as well as supplemental information on RBZ liabilities being serviced and settled by the Treasury.  
- Review and publish the materiality of liabilities related to PPPs and finance leases.  
- Periodically analyze revisions to understand the drivers of revisions and where relevant use the results of the analysis to inform PSDS compilation procedures.

*IMF | Technical Report – Zimbabwe Data Quality Assessment for Public Sector Debt Statistics*

### 48. The timeliness and frequency of disseminated public debt reports has steadily improved

### 48. The timeliness and frequency of disseminated public debt reports has steadily improved

### Timeliness and frequency of publications
- Comprehensive annual debt reports have been published since 2018 and have become more timely, with the last report for 2023 published within six months of the end of the year.
- A statement of public debt as at the end of September is produced for consideration alongside budget documents and is placed before Parliament before the end of November each year.
- Quarterly debt reports were introduced in June 2024; as at the time of the mission two had been published.
  - The first quarterly report was published within three months of the end of the period.
  - The second quarterly report was published within two months of the end of the period.
- Quarterly Treasury bulletins have included a summary table on the PPG debt stock at the end of the quarter, along with monthly debt servicing payments, since the report for 2024 Quarter 1. These Treasury bulletins are published within three months of the end of the quarter.
- Current practice: there is no release calendar informing users when the next report will be published. The report notes this is contrary to good statistical practice, which recommends pre-announcing publication dates to promote equality of access.

### Historical time series and coverage
- Annual debt reports include a long historic debt time series back to 1980 for:
  - external debt (in US dollars)
  - domestic debt (in Zimbabwe dollars)
- No long time series are available for total public debt or for further breakdowns (e.g., external debt by bilateral and multilateral creditors), which limits usefulness for analysts and researchers.
- Users and surveys highlighted concerns about partial sector and instrument coverage, including:
  - lack of coverage of arrears and other accounts payable
  - demand for more information on pension liabilities
  - requests for expanded coverage of subnational governments and public corporations

### Drivers of debt change, reconciliation, and revisions
- Public debt reports focus mainly on end-of-period debt stocks and do not systematically show drivers of changes in debt.
  - Reports include useful commentary on largest drivers behind movements in debt stocks.
  - The inclusion of tables reconciling changes in debt stocks over a period to the flows during that period is recommended (example in Appendix III, Table A2).
- Revisions practice:
  - The ZPDMO has yet to develop and publish a policy for revisions to the PSDS. It is recommended that, in accordance with international statistical standards, such a policy be developed, published and implemented.
  - Quarterly debt reports flag data as “preliminary pending finalization of the validation and reconciliation process” but do not explain reasons for revisions.
  - Example: 2022 external debt was revised from USD$12,827 million to USD$12,800 million between the 2022 and 2023 publications; this revision was not highlighted in the 2023 debt report nor was the reason explained.
  - The lack of tables showing recent time series hinders transparent display of revisions.

### Consistency across publications and institutional coordination
- A Macroeconomic Consistent Framework Working Group meets three to four times a year and includes representatives from the MoFEDIP (including ZPDMO), RBZ, and the Zimbabwe National Statistics Agency (ZimStat). The working group reviews and analyzes macroeconomic statistics to identify and correct inconsistencies.
- The mission found good consistency:
  - Figures in public debt bulletins were consistent with the published government component of external debt.
  - Changes in debt stock appeared comparable to net incurrences of liabilities published in the balance of payments, with exchange rate fluctuations explaining differences.
  - Small differences observed between debt data as at end-June 2024 in the quarterly debt bulletin and equivalent figures in the quarterly Treasury bulletin; figures as at end-September 2024 exactly match.

### Dissemination channels, metadata, and accessibility
- Zimbabwe disseminates macroeconomic statistics, including PSDS, via the National Summary Data Page (NSDP). The NSDP includes:
  - government debt (both domestic and external)
  - external debt (both public and private)
  - other macroeconomic statistics, such as balance of payments, GDP, and consumer price index
- Overall coordination of the NSDP lies with ZimStat; MoFEDIP and RBZ disseminate data via the NSDP.
- Current NSDP PSDS coverage: annual central government gross debt (and external debt) is disseminated for the period 2019-2021. ZPDMO is encouraged to extend this data series to 2023 and maintain the time series going forward.
- Metadata:
  - Some metadata exists on the IMF DSBB using the DQAF structure, but it was last updated in 2013 and is in urgent need of review.
  - Public debt reports include limited metadata (e.g., valuation used for Treasury bills and bonds, coverage of public entities and instruments, definitions of public and publicly guaranteed debt).
  - Recommendation: include more summary metadata in reports (tables, footnotes, text, or annex).
- Data formats and dissemination recommendations:
  - Most public debt data is only available in pdf format, not in manipulative electronic formats (MS Excel, csv, SDMX).
  - ZPDMO should provide data in Excel, csv, SDMX to enhance usability.
  - ZPDMO should disseminate PSDS via the Joint IMF-World Bank Quarterly Public Sector Debt statistics database (QPSD) to facilitate cross-country comparability and provide easily manipulable formats.
- User engagement:
  - ZPDMO has partnered with the Zimbabwe Coalition on Debt and Development (ZIMCODD) to re-disseminate data in simplified formats and produce an annual public debt factsheet.
  - Public debt bulletins include contact information; the 2023 annual report encourages feedback. The mission found little evidence of significant volumes of user queries.
  - Recommendation: promote user feedback, provide an email address, elaborate on user services, and conduct outreach (workshops, events, surveys).

### Strengths
- Quarterly debt reports are published within three months of the quarter end.
- Comprehensive annual debt reports are published within six months of the end of the year.
- The PSDS demonstrate good levels of consistency and comparability between publications.
- The long timeseries of external and domestic debt back to 1980 provides users with a valuable data source for analyzing economic trends.
- Public debt reports include detailed and useful commentary, tables and charts serving different user groups.
- Contingent liabilities (government guarantees) are clearly reported as supplementary data, with annual public debt reports providing details of each individual loan guarantee.

### Recommendations for improvements
- Publish a release calendar to inform users when each public debt report will be published and disseminate reports in accordance with this calendar.
- Include additional tables in public debt reports to show the recent evolution of public debt (by component) and to demonstrate the drivers of changes in debt stocks.
- Regularly update the annual public debt data on the NSDP and update the related metadata.
- Develop, publish, and apply a PSDS revision policy to guide users and PSDS compilers on the process for reporting and classifying revisions.
- Provide more comprehensive and accessible metadata within public debt reports to explain coverage, concepts and definitions, data sources, and basis of recording, highlighting any divergences from international statistical standards.
- Disseminate public debt data in formats that support manipulation, analysis, and re-dissemination (e.g., Excel, csv, SDMX).
- Disseminate quarterly PSDS through the Joint IMF-World Bank QPSD to facilitate standardized cross-country comparison.
- Promote an on-request user service where users can directly raise queries with the public debt compilers and receive responses.

*IMF | Technical Report – Zimbabwe Data Quality Assessment for Public Sector Debt Statistics*

### 9. Indicate your level of satisfaction with the coverage of

### 9. Indicate your level of satisfaction with the coverage of

### Coverage of public debt of public nonfinancial corporations (i.e., state-owned enterprises)
- Question: "public debt of public nonfinancial corporations (i.e., state-owned enterprises)."
- Responses (by satisfaction category, order implied by layout): 0 3 1 3 2
- Debt instrument categories listed: None – coverage is adequate for all debt instruments; Accounts payables (arrears); Loans; Debt securities; Pension liabilities; Other

### Debt instruments perceived as inadequately covered in disseminated public debt
- Question: "In your view, which debt instruments are inadequately covered in disseminated public debt?"
- Responses (by instrument category, order implied by layout): 0 8 3 1 5 0
- Instrument categories listed: None – coverage is adequate for all subsectors of the public sector; Local government / State governments; Public corporations; Budgetary central government; Extra-budgetary units; Other

### Subsector for which more coverage of PSDS is desired
- Question: "In your view, for which subsector would you like to see more coverage of PSDS?"
- Responses (by subsector category, order implied by layout): 0 8 6 1 1 0
- Binary preference: Yes No

### Valuation of PSDS outstanding stock positions
- Question: "Is the way that the PSDS outstanding stock positions are valued appropriate (e.g., market, nominal, face, principal outstanding)?"
- Responses: 6 3

### Periodicity and timeliness — Periodicity of disseminated PSDS
- Question 13: "Indicate your level of satisfaction with the periodicity of disseminated PSDS (e.g., monthly, quarterly, annual)."
- Responses (by satisfaction category, order implied by layout): 1 4 2 2 0

### Periodicity and timeliness — Timeliness of PSDS dissemination
- Question 14: "Do you consider that the PSDS are disseminated in a sufficiently timely manner (i.e., the time lag after the period to which the PSDS pertain)?"
- Responses (Yes No Not sure): 3 3 3

### Dissemination practices — Release schedule punctuality
- Question 15: "Is there a published release schedule/calendar for PSDS and are the PSDS released punctually as per the pre-announced schedule?"
- Responses (Yes, and the data is released on schedule; Yes, and the data is sometimes released on schedule; Yes, and the data is never released on schedule; No; Not sure): 3 1 1 2 2

### Dissemination practices — Analysis explaining revisions and discontinuities
- Question 16: "Is analysis published to identify and explain the causes of revisions, breaks, adjustments, and discontinuities in time series data and/or unusual changes in economic trends?"
- Responses (Always informed; Sometimes informed; Never informed; Not aware): 3 3 3 0

### Dissemination practices — Notification of preliminary/revised/updated status at dissemination
- Question 17: "At the time of PSDS dissemination, are users informed whether the nature of data is preliminary, revised or updated?"
- Responses (Always; Sometimes; Never; Not sure): 1 4 1 3

### Dissemination practices — Advance notice of major changes
- Question 18: "Do you receive advance notice as to when major changes will be introduced into the PSDS (such as changes to coverage, methods or data sources)?"
- Responses (Yes No Not sure): 0 0 3 6
  - Note: layout shows four response slots; recorded values are 0 0 3 6

### Accessibility and usefulness — Presentation facilitating interpretation and comparisons
- Question 19: "Do you agree that the disseminated PSDS are presented in a way that facilitates proper interpretation and meaningful comparisons?"
- Responses (Strongly agree; Agree; Neither agree nor disagree; Disagree; Strongly disagree): 1 3 2 2 1

### Accessibility and usefulness — Availability of comprehensive source and methods documentation (metadata)
- Question 20: "Is there comprehensive published source and methods document or information (metadata) readily accessible to users?"
- Responses (Yes, available and accessible; Partial information available; No information available; Not sure): 3 2 0 4

### Accessibility and usefulness — Consistency and reconcilability with other macroeconomic datasets
- Question 21: "To your knowledge are the PSDS largely consistent and reconcilable over time with other macroeconomic data sets like, government finance statistics, national accounts, international investment position, external debt statistics, and monetary and financial statistics?"
- Responses (Fully consistent; Partly consistent; Not consistent; Not sure): 2 4 0 3

### Standardized reporting templates included in the source
- Table A1: Standardized Quarterly Debt Reporting Table — structure headings include:
  - By maturity and type of instrument (Short-term by original maturity; Long-term, by original maturity; Total gross debt; By currency of denomination; By residence of the creditor; By interest rate type; Memoranda items)
  - Instrument lines include: Currency and deposits; Debt securities; Loans; Insurance, pensions, and standardized guarantee schemes; Other accounts payable; Special Drawing Rights (SDRs)
- Table A2: Reconciliation between Public Sector Debt Flows and Stocks — column headings and notes:
  - Debt stocks: Opening balance; CHANGES DURING THE PERIOD; Debt stocks: Closing balance; Transactions; Other Economic Flows; Incurrence of liability; Repayment of liability; Other; Revaluations; Other Volume Changes; Principal Interest
  - Notes 1–5 describe treatment when data unavailable, interest transaction effects, other transactions, revaluations (foreign exchange rates), and footnote guidance for other volume changes

### Authorities' response
- "The Zimbabwe authorities accepted the findings and recommendations detailed in this report with no additional comments."

*IMF | Technical Report – Zimbabwe Data Quality Assessment for Public Sector Debt Statistics*

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/tar/2025/english/tarea2025060-print-pdf.pdf_