2026 ROC Review FAQ
Source details
- Canonical URL
- 2026 ROC Review FAQ
Other formats
Overview and objective
- The 2026 Review of Program Design and Conditionality (ROC) examines how IMF-supported programs performed amid significant shocks and heightened global uncertainty.
- The objective is to improve implementation and outcomes, not to lower standards.
- Programs will continue to be anchored in the 2002 Guidelines on Conditionality and focused on resolving balance of payments problems and restoring medium-term external viability.
- The Review identifies areas to enhance program design and conditionality so IMF-supported programs better support countries navigating a more shock-prone global economy.
Key findings on program performance
- Fund-supported programs responded with speed and agility to successive major shocks.
- During the pandemic, emergency financing and program augmentations helped 77 members sustain essential spending, protect vulnerable populations, and avoid sharp adjustments.
- When further shocks arose, programs were adjusted through augmentations, waivers, adjustors, and revisions.
- Front-loaded but realistic and sustained fiscal adjustment has been associated with a higher likelihood of program success.
- Social spending conditionality (SSC) expanded during the 2026 ROC period, reflecting greater attention to inclusive growth and protecting vulnerable groups.
- In PRGT-supported programs, those that protected or expanded social spending were marked by more sustained implementation and higher degrees of success.
- According to the 2026 ROC stakeholder survey: 90 percent of respondents view the IMF as a trusted advisor and most consider its engagement as timely, well-focused, and effective in helping members confront shocks.
Areas for refinement identified by the Review
- Revenue projections could have better reflected implementation challenges and capacity constraints, particularly in PRGT-supported programs.
- Some reforms were delayed or reversed, particularly in politically sensitive or institutionally complex areas.
- The Review notes that the benefits of deeper structural reforms often emerged over horizons beyond a single Fund arrangement, underscoring the importance of prioritization, sequencing, and sustained implementation.
- Earlier program engagement can help preserve policy space needed for more balanced adjustment; delayed adjustment may ease near-term pressures but ultimately necessitate sharper corrections, amplifying the burden on the most vulnerable.
Policy recommendations and design principles
- Update and strengthen the IMF's existing approach to program design to be more coherent, realistic, adaptable, and effective, while remaining tailored to each country’s specific circumstances.
- Key benefits for borrowing countries:
- More realistic and better-tailored programs: economic assumptions, policy choices, and reform sequencing that are more realistic and mindful of countries’ capacity, particularly for low-income, fragile and conflict-affected countries.
- Greater flexibility in responding to shocks: more systematic use of risk assessments, scenario analysis, and contingency planning to allow policies to adapt more quickly.
- More focused and impactful reforms: fewer but deeper reforms, better integrated IMF capacity development to strengthen institutions and deliver reforms.
- Stronger and more durable outcomes: emphasis on sustainable solutions through realistic financing strategies, better monitoring, and earlier course correction when circumstances change.
- Fiscal policy guidance:
- Front-loading of fiscal adjustment is associated with higher chances of program success but is not recommended universally; the Review takes account of country circumstances.
- Where fiscal consolidation is essential, the Review encourages frontloading only to the extent feasible and alongside realistic, growth-friendly measures and adequate protection for the vulnerable.
- The pace and composition of adjustment should reflect country circumstances, including political economy considerations and distributional impacts.
- The Review calls for a more balanced mix of policies, relying on both revenue and expenditure measures and a stronger role for monetary policy conditionality as appropriate.
Implementation approach and sequencing
- The ROC is part of a set of major reviews the Fund is undertaking, including the Comprehensive Surveillance Review and Review of the Debt Sustainability Framework for Low Income Countries.
- The ROC builds on and complements other reviews of the IMF lending framework, including reviews of the PRGT, charges and surcharges, and access limits.
- Implementation will be phased, proportionate, and risk‑based, relying on refining existing guidance, enhancing tools, and leveraging ongoing workstreams.
- Initial work will focus on:
- Updating the guidance note to map the operational implications of the recommendations.
- Developing new analytical tools and templates.
- Subsequent steps will shift to country-level implementation:
- Country teams will apply new templates to new program requests while ongoing programs incorporate them as relevant.
- End-program summaries will be prepared as programs conclude, alongside other applicable guidance.
References