The IEO’s latest Annual Report covers its activities during the financial year ended April 2007. It summarizes the most recent IEO evaluations of The IMF and Aid to Sub-Saharan Africa and IMF Exchange Rate Policy Advice. The report also presents messages that are common to many IEO evaluations and are particularly noteworthy as the IMF proceeds with the implementation of its Medium-Term Strategy. Other topics discussed include implementation of recommendations made in 2006 by the External Evaluation Panel of the IEO, ongoing projects, the identification of future evaluations, and summaries of follow-ups of past evaluations.

The Annual Report 2007 to the Board of Governors reviews the IMF’s activities and policies during the financial year (May 1, 2006, through April 30, 2007). This year’s Report has been streamlined and translated into three more languages than in the past: Arabic, Japanese, and Russian. Besides an Overview, the chapters cover promoting financial and macroeconomic stability and growth through surveillance; program support; capacity building; technical assistance and training; and the IMF’s governance, organization, and finances. The full financial statements for the year and other appendixes are provided on a CD-ROM.

This Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) Annual Report 2012 presents an overview of overall developments in FY2012. In FY2012, the IEO expended approximately 97 percent of its total budgetary resources, including the approved budget amount and the resources carried forward from FY2011 as authorized. Vacancies amounted to about one and one-half staff years over the course of the financial year. This level of vacancies is within the range of what could be expected in a small organization with structural difficulties in recruitment and retention.

The Independent Evaluation Office (IEO) evaluation on International Reserves: IMF Concerns and Country Perspectives was discussed by the Board in December 2012. This evaluation examined the IMF’s analysis of the effect of reserves on the stability of the international monetary system and its advice on reserve adequacy assessments in the context of bilateral surveillance. In the multilateral context, the evaluation acknowledged the IMF’s broader work stream on the international monetary system but noted that this work had not sufficiently informed the analysis and recommendations regarding reserves. The IEO evaluation of The Role of the IMF as Trusted Advisor was discussed by the Board in February 2013. This evaluation found that perceptions of the IMF had improved, but that they varied markedly by region and country type. Recognizing that there will always be an inherent tension between the IMF’s roles as a global watchdog and as a trusted advisor to member country authorities, the evaluation report explored how the IMF could sustain the more positive image it had achieved in the aftermath of the recent global crisis. The evaluation found that among key challenges facing the IMF were improving the value added and relevance of IMF advice and overcoming the perception of a lack of even-handedness.

The Annual Report 2008 to the Board of Governors reviews the IMF’s activities and policies during the financial year (May 1, 2007, through April 30, 2008). There are five chapters: (1) Overview: Refocusing the IMF; (2) Developments in the Global Economy and Financial Markets; (3) Fostering Macroeconomic and Financial Stability and Growth Through Surveillance; (4) Program Support and Capacity Building; and (5) Governance, Organization, and Finances. The full financial statements for the year, other appendixes, and materials supplementing the text are provided on a CD-ROM.

Describing how formerly secretive financial institutions have been slow to accept responsibility for the consequences of their investments - especially the problems that can result from projects in developing countries - she shows that financing institutions can cause significant social and environmental damage and argues that new accountability mechanisms are necessary to reduce or prevent such damage. Because such institutions operate on a global scale, only semi-judicial accounting mechanisms can provide the necessary accountability. It is time for the private financial sector to follow multilateral financial institutions in creating independent mechanisms, mediation procedures, and access to decision makers for people harmed or potentially harmed by projects financed by their institutions.

IEO evaluations are an integral part of the Fund’s learning culture, helping the Fund absorb lessons that improve its work. In addition, the objectivity of IEO evaluations has bolstered the Fund’s credibility. In discussing the report of the External Evaluation of the IEO (the “Lissakers report”), Executive Directors welcomed the suggestions to strengthen follow-up to the IEO recommendations?including more Board involvement—and supported a more systematic approach for following up and monitoring the implementation of IEO recommendations approved by the Board. This periodic monitoring report (PMR) is the first such effort under the new procedures approved by the Executive Board in January 2007. In particular, it responds to the instruction that “Management shall present to the Board a periodic monitoring report on the state of implementation of actions contained in the forward-looking implementation plans already in force and not deemed completed on the occasion of a prior periodic monitoring report. These reports shall indicate difficulties in implementing the original plan and propose remedial or substitute actions whenever appropriate. The first periodic monitoring report shall be prepared following the delivery of the 2007 IEO Annual Report. As the IEO Annual Reports cover the status of all past IEO recommendations, it is expected that the first periodic monitoring report produced by Management would also review the implementation of recommendations made to date.”