Omnibus Paper on Easing Work Pressures

Decision A. Lapse of Time Procedures for Completion of Program Reviews

The Fund decides to approve the lapse of time procedures for completion of program reviews set forth in the Attachment to this Decision. The presumption set forth in paragraph 2 of the Attachment will come into effect for program reviews for which a Policy Consultation Meeting is held after the date of this Decision. The provisions of Decision No. 14003-(07/107), December 6, 2007, shall continue to apply to cases where a Policy Consultation Meeting was undertaken prior to the date of this Decision but where the relevant review has yet to be completed. Decision No. 14003-(07/107) shall lapse upon the earlier of the completion of the last review to which Decision No. 14003-(07/107) applies or January 31, 2010.

Attachment to Decision A

Lapse of Time Completion of Program Reviews

1. The completion of a program review under a Fund arrangement on a lapse of time basis may be proposed by the Managing Director with the approval of the Executive Director for the member concerned, or by the Executive Director for the member concerned, in accordance with the procedures set forth herein.

2. Eligibility: Completion of a program review on a lapse of time basis will be presumed where all of the following conditions apply: (i) the relevant arrangement does not involve exceptional access; (ii) the most recent program review under the relevant arrangement was not concluded on a lapse of time basis; (iii) the relevant review is to be completed under an ECF or an SCF arrangement and does not take place immediately after the completion of an ad-hoc review under an ECF or SCF arrangement pursuant to Section II, paragraph 2(h) of the PRGT Instrument; (iv) the review to be completed does not raise general policy issues requiring Board discussion; (v) all prior actions for the review have been met; (vi) the review does not introduce major changes in the objectives or design of the program, including but not limited to, major changes in conditionality for future reviews, the combination of future reviews envisaged under the arrangement, the rephasing of disbursements, or an augmentation of access other than an augmentation of access not exceeding 25 percent¹ of a member quota approved pursuant to Section II, paragraph 2(h) of the PRGT Instrument; and (vii) performance under the member’s program does not raise concerns as to whether the review should be completed, in particular as a result of deviations, other than minor deviations, from the quantitative performance criteria and structural benchmarks. Where these conditions are not met, a program review would not be eligible for com-pletion on a lapse of time basis. A review under a Resilience and Sustainability Facility arrangement would be eligible for completion on a lapse of time basis where (i) the review under the accompanying arrangement or instrument supporting the member’s upper credit tranche-quality program meets the criteria for completion on a lapse of time basis set out above; and (ii) staff has determined that all reform measures to be assessed under the review have been implemented.

3. Procedures for Proposing Lapse of Time:

(a) By the Managing Director: The Managing Director’s proposal for completion of a program review on a lapse of time basis will be made at the time of circulation of the staff paper for the review to the Executive Board. The cover memorandum for the circulated staff paper will: (i) include a deadline for Executive Directors to object to a proposal by the Managing Director for lapse of time completion that is consistent with paragraph 4 below; (ii) specify the date upon which the decision will become effective if no objection to the proposal for lapse of time completion is received; (iii) specify a reserved date, consistent with minimum circulation periods for program reviews, for discussion if an Executive Director objects to the proposal for lapse of time consideration; and (iv) explain the reasons why lapse of time completion is warranted. Should the Managing Director judge that a member meets the lapse of time criteria, but the Executive Director for the member concerned does not approve, the cover memorandum circulating the staff paper would include a notation to this effect.

(b) By the Executive Director for the Member Concerned: The Executive Director for the member concerned may propose the completion of a program review on a lapse of time basis no more than two business days after the issuance of the staff paper for the program review to the Executive Board, and preferably, as soon as possible after the circulation of the staff paper. A notification from the Executive Director for the member concerned proposing lapse of time completion of a program review will be issued to the Executive Board and shall: (i) include a deadline for Executive Directors to object to the proposal for lapse of time completion that is consistent with paragraph 4 below; (ii) specify the date upon which the decision will become effective if no objection to the proposal for lapse of time completion is received; (iii) specify a reserved date, consistent with minimum circulation periods for program reviews, for discussion if an Executive Director objects to the proposal for lapse of time consideration; and (iv) set out the reasons presented by the Executive Director for the member concerned as to why lapse of time completion is warranted

4. Objections: An Executive Director may object to a proposal for lapse of time completion of a program review no later than five business days after the issuance of the staff paper for the program review to the Executive Board, and need not state the reason for such objection. Whenever an Executive Director objects to completion of a program review on a lapse of time basis, the staff paper for the program review shall be discussed by the Executive Board on the date that has been reserved for discussion, consistent with the minimum circulation guidelines for staff papers for program reviews.

5. Effective Date of Review: If no objection is received to a proposal for a lapse of time completion of a program review during the period in which such objections may be made, the proposed decision(s) associated with the program review will be approved with effect on the date of effectiveness stated in the cover note described in paragraph 3 above. (SM/09/213, Sup. 3, 08/31/09)

Decision B. Ex-Post Evaluations

The Fund decides, with effect from the date of this decision, to approve the proposal to allow multi-country ex-post evaluations, as set forth in paragraph 6 of SM/09/213, August 5, 2009.

Paragraph 6 of SM/09/213

“6. It is proposed that ex post evaluations be conducted on a multi-country basis where feasible (e.g., after a global shock), thus also facilitating cross-country comparison. These assessments would involve cross-country analyses of whether justifications presented at the outset of the programs were consistent with Fund policies and review performance under the programs.² Consistent with the current guidelines, the cross-country analyses would also assess the appropriateness of the policy response—including the mix of financing and adjustment—based on the outturn. In line with BUFF/02/159, these assessments would be completed—approved by management for circulation to the Board—within a year of the end of the arrangements.”

Decision C. Ex-Post Assessments

[Repealed].³

Decision D. Procedural Deadlines for Completing Article IV Consultations

The last sentence of paragraph 17 of Decision No. 13919-(07/51), June 15, 2007 shall be amended to read as follows:

“It is expected that no later than sixty-five days after the termination of discussions between the member and the staff, the Executive Board will reach conclusions and thereby complete the consultation under Article IV, except in the case of consultations with members eligible for financing under the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility identified in Decision No. 8240- (86/56), SAF, adopted March 26, 1986, as amended, where it is expected that the Executive Board will reach conclusions no later than three months from the termination of discussions between the member and the staff.”

Decision E. Procedural Deadlines for Completing Policy Reviews

The Fund decides, with effect from the date of this decision, to approve the proposal to convert mandatory deadlines for the completion of policy reviews into expectations, as set forth in paragraph 16 of SM/09/213, August 5, 2009. Accordingly, reviews of Fund policies shall henceforth be expected to be completed by the deadlines specified in relevant Executive Board decisions. These decisions are hereby amended accordingly.

Paragraph 16 of SM/09/213

“16. Deadlines for policy papers. It is proposed to extend the proposal to policy papers, eliminating the need for formal decisions in the event papers are not discussed by the original deadline. While formal decisions on the timing of policy reviews give the Board some confidence that a certain timeframe will be respected, they do entail a nonnegligible administrative cost. Often, the delay is minor or results from a request from the Board. In practice, the Board has never refused to grant such extensions. Further, the monthly meetings on the calendar now give more control to the Board over the work program, such that casting deadlines as expectations rather than obligations would seem to have few, if any, downsides.”

Decision F: Review of Experience

It is expected that the experience with the Decisions set forth in SM/09/213, Sup. 3 will be reviewed by no later than August 27, 2011. (SM/09/213, Sup. 3, 8/31/09)

Decision A-13207 (08/28/09),

August 28, 2009,

as amended by Decision Nos. 14766-(10/115), November 29, 2010,

15355-(13/32), April 8, 2013,

15481-(13/103), November 11, 2013, and

15763-(15/39), April 23, 2015 and

17231-(22/37),

April 13, 2022

¹ Ed Note: Decision No. 15481-(13/103), November 11, 2013, provides: “Upon completion of the conditions specified in paragraph 3 of the Board of Governors Resolution No. 66-2, the percentage of quota referred to in subparagraph (vi) of paragraph 2 of the Attachment to Decision A set forth in DEC/A/13207, as amended, with regard to the limit of access in augmentations considered for approval on a lapse-of-time basis shall be changed from 25 percent to 12.5 percent.”

² See SM/02/246, 7/30/02.

³ Ed Note: Decision No. 15763-(15/39), adopted April 23, 2015, states: “The Fund decides to repeal the policy on Ex Post Assessments (EPA) set forth in BUFF/03/51 of April 8, 2003; BUFF/06/59 of May 17, 2006; and Decision C of DEC/A/13207 of August 28, 2009. The repeal of the policy on EPA is effective immediately effective except in cases where an EPA report has been already prepared by staff and submitted to management. In such cases the provisions of the EPA will continue to apply through December 31, 2015. (SM/15/81, Sup. 2, 04/28/15).”