[stop-imf] letter to IMF on external evaluation

[Robert Weissman]

>From Angela Wood of the Bretton Woods Project:

Dear friends,


As you may know the IMF's trial, ad hoc external evaluation mechanism is
currently being reviewed by the IMF's staff. In the next few weeks the
Executive Board will meet to discuss the report and to decide on how
evaluations will be carried out in the future.


Some NGOs have been calling for an independent unit to be established,
similar to the Bank's Operations Evaluation Department. Whilst many EDs
are reluctant to establish a unit the tide is slowly turning in favour of
this and now is the time to put further pressure on the EDs to agree to
do so. A decision will be taken by the Spring Meetings (mid-April).


At the moment the EDs are still deciding on the process for carrying out
the evaluation of the evaluation mechanism. In the next week or two they
will decide on whether or not to include external comments in the
finalised staff report or whether to finalise the report first and have
it discussed and agreed by the Board before comments are solicited. 


Given the poor follow-up to previous "consultations" it will be more
effective if outside comments are included in the actual report as this
will guarantee that the EDs see them. Please write to your ED and ask
them to support this option (see letter below). I would be grateful if
you could share replies with me.


If you would like more information or suggestions for letters etc please
contact me <<awood@gn.apc.org>.


best wishes,


Angela.





Executive Director

IMF

700 19th St NW

Washington DC



12 January 2000



<bold><underline>IMF Evaluation

</underline></bold>

Dear ED,


I am writing regarding the modalities for the review of the trial,
external evaluation process. I am concerned that adequate Board attention
may not be given to the views of those outside the IMF on the
effectiveness of the trial process. 


I understand that the IMF Board's Evaluation Committee will meet in the
next two weeks to discuss whether outside comments should be solicited
and included in the staff report or whether the report should be
finalised and approved by the Board before comments are solicited. The
final decision will be taken by the Executive Board. In the interests of
transparency and good governance I urge you to support the former option. 


Given that there has been considerable dissatisfaction with the trial
process and that the staff are being asked to review a mechanism which
may affect their own working procedures, I believe it is important that
every effort is made to solicit opinions from a wide-range of
commentators. By including outside comments in the report to the Board
this will ensure that the Executive Directors are aware of a range of
views when discussing the options for a permanent evaluation procedure.
This is particularly important given the poor follow-up by IMF staff
after outside comments were solicited on the External Evaluation of ESAF.
In that case it was not clear whether the Board ever received or
discussed the comments or what action was taken in the light of them. 


To ensure the consultation is effective:

 	the staff should be required to publicise the consultation as
widely as
possible and ensure that the process for contributing comments is 
clear;

 	the draft report should be circulated for comments in advance and
these
should be included in the final report;

 	It must be clearly specified how comments and recommendations will
feed
into the evaluation process and minutes should be made available of the
Board's discussions; 

 	the final report should be published. 


As you know, the Bretton Woods Project supports the establishment of an
independent evaluation unit which reports to the Board, similar to the
World Bank's Operations Evaluation Department. The unit should:

 	have the capacity to evaluate the effectiveness of IMF programmes
and
operations on a systematic basis, particularly in relation to their
social impacts and programme breakdown;

 	all reports should be publicly disclosed;

 	there should be a transparent and participative selection process
for
agreeing the focus and terms of reference of occasional, ad hoc reviews.
The terms of reference of these reviews should be published on the IMF's
website; 

 	a formal process should be established to ensure effective
follow-up
and implementation of the recommendations made.


I would be grateful if you would confirm for me the position you will
take on this matter, and how the Evaluation Committee and Board agree to
proceed.



Yours sincerely,







cc. Gordon Brown, Chair, International Monetary and Finance Committee

     Thomas Bernes. Chair, Evaluation Committee

____________________________________________________________

The Bretton Woods Project works on World Bank and IMF issues 

with a network of 27 UK non-government organisations. 


CONTACT DETAILS:

E-m: awood@gn.apc.org

Postal address: Bretton Woods Project, 35 Lower Marsh, London SE1 7RT

Tel: + 44 (0) 207 523 2117

Fax: + 44 (0) 207 620 0719

www.brettonwoodsproject.org