## Report on the Incidence of Longer-Term Program Engagement

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [Report on the Incidence of Longer-Term Program Engagement](https://www.imf.org/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/np/pdr/ufr/2006/_040506.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/np/pdr/ufr/2006/_040506.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/np/pdr/ufr/2006/_040506.pdf.json)

---

### Background and Purpose
- The Executive Board established requirements for undertaking ex post assessments (EPAs) for members with a longer-term program engagement to provide:
  - "an analysis of the economic problems facing the member and a critical and frank review of progress during the period of Fund-supported programs, as the basis for a forward-looking assessment and strategy for future Fund engagement, including, where appropriate, an explicit “exit strategy.”"
- A staff paper reviewing experience with EPAs and other issues relating to longer-term program engagement has been circulated to Executive Directors for Board discussion at a date to be determined.
- The Executive Board requested a semi-annual report on the incidence of prolonged use (PIN/03/49). The fourth report covered information through June 2005; this fifth report provides information through March 2006.

### Criteria for Ex Post Assessments (Box 1)
- For members that have received access to Fund financing through the GRA or a blend of GRA and PRGF/ESAF resources, an EPA is to be undertaken when the member has spent "at least 7 of the past 10 years under upper credit tranche, stand-by or extended arrangements, including precautionary arrangements, or a mix of GRA and PRGF/ESAF resources."
- "A member would also undergo an EPA when it has had two or more multi-year PRGF/ESAF arrangements."
- Example provided: "if a member has undergone two or more multi-year PRGF/ESAF arrangements followed by a SBA, it would be subject to an EPA even if it has not yet spent 7 of the past 10 years in Fund arrangements."
- Timing: "An EPA would be undertaken prior to any proposed new arrangement, provided that the member continues to meet these criteria."
- Directors' considerations reflected in the criteria:
  - Recognition that "in some cases, longer-term financial engagement can be beneficial," especially in low-income countries and in transition and emerging market countries with institution-building issues.
  - Recognition that "precautionary arrangements may not involve direct use of Fund resources" but "do provide access to those resources and put the Fund’s reputation at stake."
  - Decision that EPAs "would be undertaken for all members with longer-term program engagement as defined above," with the contents of assessments distinguishing beneficial longer-term engagement from cases reflecting "a persistent failure to achieve program objectives."

### Incidence and Recent Developments (as of March 31, 2006)
- No member was either added to or removed from the list of members with longer-term program engagement between end–June 2005 and end–March 2006 (Table 1).
- At end–March 2006, EPAs had already been discussed at the Board for "40 members" (Table 2).
- Of the nine EPAs expected to have been prepared for Board consideration in the second half of 2005, "Seven of the nine EPAs" were completed; the other two—"Togo and Argentina"—are expected in 2006 in the context of their respective Article IV discussions.
  - Note: "An EPA for Argentina is required at the first post-program Article IV discussion."
- Over the six-month period April-September 2006, ex post assessments for "six countries are tentatively expected to be discussed by the Board" (Table 3).

### Timetable and Tentative Expectations (Table 3)
- Ex post assessments tentatively expected for Board discussion April-September 2006:
  - Argentina
  - Burkina Fasso
  - Guyana
  - Mauritania
  - Tanzania
  - Togo
- Procedural notes from Table 3:
  - EPA expected to be discussed in the context of Article IV consultations or combined Article IV program review discussions unless otherwise indicated.
  - For Argentina: EPA expected to be discussed in the context of Article IV consultation, together with an ex-post evaluation of program engagement supported by exceptional access.
  - For Burkina Fasso and Guyana: EPA expected to be discussed in the third quarter of 2006; "Member would continue to meet the LTPE definition if the LTPE definition for PRGF users were made the same as the one applying for GRA users."
  - For Tanzania: "EPA expected to be discussed in the context of fifth program review."

### Records and Documentation
- Table 1 lists members with longer-term program engagement as of March 31, 2006, separated into PRGF-eligible Members and Non-PRGF-eligible Members, indicating current arrangement status (Current arrangement, No Current Arrangement, Precautionary, Non-Precautionary).
- Table 2 provides a chronological list of ex post assessments considered by the Board with associated discussion types and dates (2003–2006).

*Source: IMF Policy Development and Review Department; Report on the Incidence of Longer-Term Program Engagement (as of March 31, 2006).*

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/np/pdr/ufr/2006/_040506.pdf_