## 2026 ROC Review FAQ ## Source details **Canonical URL:** [2026 ROC Review FAQ](https://www.imf.org/en/topics/2026-review-of-program-design-and-conditionality/roc-faq) ## Other formats - [Markdown version](/en/topics/2026-review-of-program-design-and-conditionality/roc-faq/index.md) - [Structured JSON version](/en/topics/2026-review-of-program-design-and-conditionality/roc-faq/index.json) - [Bundle manifest](/en/topics/2026-review-of-program-design-and-conditionality/roc-faq/bundle-manifest.json) --- ### 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 - [2026 Review of Program Design and Conditionality](https://www.imf.org/en/topics/2026-review-of-program-design-and-conditionality) - [Review of the Debt Sustainability Framework for Low Income Countries.](https://www.imf.org/en/topics/2026-review-of-low-income-countries-debt-sustainability-framework) - [PRGT](https://www.imf.org/en/publications/policy-papers/issues/2026/03/26/2026-update-of-resource-adequacy-of-the-poverty-reduction-and-growth-trust-resilience-and-574972) - [surcharges](https://www.imf.org/en/publications/policy-papers/issues/2024/10/21/review-of-charges-and-the-surcharge-policy-reform-proposals-556499) - [limits](https://www.imf.org/en/publications/policy-papers/issues/2024/12/23/comprehensive-review-of-gra-access-limits-559998) _Source: https://www.imf.org/en/topics/2026-review-of-program-design-and-conditionality/roc-faq_