Annual Report & Financial Statements 2009/10
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The Cochrane Collaboration Annual Report & Financial Statements 2009/10 Working together to provide the best evidence for health care Financial Statements for the year ended 31 March 2010 Company Number 3044323 Charity Number 1045921 The Cochrane Collaboration Annual Report & Financial Statements 2009/10 © The Cochrane Collaboration, 2010. All rights reserved. Contents 1 Introductions 3 From the Co-Chairs of the Steering Group 5 From the Chief Executive Officer of the Collaboration 8 From the Editor in Chief of The Cochrane Library 10 2 Activity Reports 13 Accountability and reporting structure of the Collaboration’s groups and committees 14 From the core teams Cochrane Editorial Unit 15 IMS Team 18 Secretariat 20 Web Team 22 From other selected core groups Monitoring and Registration Committee 24 Training Working Group 26 From the entity executives Centre Directors 28 Co-ordinating Editors 30 Consumer Network 32 Fields 34 Managing Editors 35 Methods Groups 37 Trials Search Co-ordinators 39 3 The Collaboration’s Year 41 News Highlights 42 Our Colloquium 48 Prizes and Awards 2009 53 Cochrane Projects 58 4 Business and Financial Review 73 The year at a glance 74 Our funders 77 Our Steering Group 82 Trustees’ Report and Financial Statements 84 Trustees’ Report 84 Independent Auditor’s Report 94 Statement of Financial Activities 95 Consolidated Statement of Financial Activities 96 Balance Sheets 97 Notes to the Financial Activities 98 5 Acknowledgements 107 1 Introductions Introductions From the Co-Chairs of the Steering Group HE Cochrane Collaboration is a things that we can do better or differently, Twonderful and diverse organisation – and we are addressing those points. They rising from the germ of an idea back in include: 1993, taken along in a growing wave of enthusiasm by a few early pioneers, Improving our governance developing over the years into the arrangements Collaboration we know today of more To achieve this we are improving the than 27,000 people in over 100 countries. Steering Group’s focus on key strategic Lorne Becker As Co-Chairs of the Collaboration’s affairs by reducing the number of Steering Group we are very aware of how members, whilst increasing their focus on privileged we are to hold for a little while the our priorities. We are simplifying our trust of our colleagues, and of the millions structures and creating ‘executives’ to who depend on the Collaboration’s work. give a focal point for each of our groups of contributors, linking these formally with At its heart, the Collaboration is about the Steering Group, and thereby health, and about how the health care of improving communication. And we’re individuals and populations can be developing core Key Performance improved through providing high-quality Indicators, so that we can measure our Jonathan Craig information about the effectiveness of progress better. healthcare interventions. Reaching a place where we can with confidence say that Improving our communication we are providing that information, in a We found that we don’t always format that can be easily assimilated, to a necessarily communicate as well as we standard of which we can all be proud, is could, and that some of the terminology our vision, and our continuing task. and structures we have created tend to Following a Strategic Review of the increase rather than reduce confusion. Collaboration reporting in early 2009, we So we’re re-examining our terminology are now at the stage of developing to make sure it’s understandable to strategies to implement the Review’s everyone. We’re also reassessing our many recommendations. At its heart the marketing and communication strategies, Review reassured us that, by and large, to ensure that we’re producing a simple we are doing the right thing in the right and consistent message that can be way, but as in any organisation there are readily understood by our stakeholders. 5 Cochrane Collaboration Annual Report 2009/10 Ensuring that we maintain methodology, so we need to ensure also healthcare consumers at the that our methodological developments heart of our work, and that we don’t run ahead of what our authors and are truly representative of global editorial teams can support. Our groups issues who support our methodological rigour We have always had a commitment to have been looking hard at how they can these crucial areas, but have struggled at best work together in co-ordinating their times to make them a reality. So we are activities and supporting us in our recruiting a new member of staff with a mission. We have been looking at how we clear role in helping our consumer can best co-ordinate our training strategy constituency to contribute effectively to across the Collaboration, building a our work, and to reflect to the wider strategic response to training at all levels. healthcare consumer world the value of We’ve been working too to improve the what we do. Over the next year we will be look, usability and content of our providing a strategic focus to new efforts websites. to improve our impact and relevance in An organisation such as The Cochrane resource-poor settings. Collaboration cannot afford to stand still; it must evolve to remain relevant in a Working better with external constantly changing healthcare organisations environment. As it evolves, we must be We are looking again at our external mindful that we need to take our partnerships, seeking ways of working thousands of contributors along with us effectively with organisations with on the journey. But the people also common missions and purposes, where change. We take this opportunity to thank the sum of our contributions can be for their huge contributions those greater than the parts. As an example, colleagues who have moved on to new we are in the late stages of establishing responsibilities during the last year. In ‘official relations’ with the World Health particular, we thank Adrian Grant for his Organization, a key partner in much of the enormous contribution as Jonathan work we do for resource-poor settings. Craig’s predecessor Co-Chair. Through all the changes, our mission remains the Improving our main product: same: to help people to make the right Cochrane Reviews in The choices about healthcare interventions, Cochrane Library whoever they are and whatever decision As it is important to ensure that our they’re making. reviews are based on up-to-date Lorne Becker Jonathan Craig 6 Lorne and delegates before the opening plenary of the Singapore Colloquium, 2009, including Edwin Chan (far left), host of the Colloquium Jonathan delivering his vision speech for the Collaboration at the closing plenary of the Singapore Colloquium, 2009 7 Cochrane Collaboration Annual Report 2009/10 From the Chief Executive Officer of the Collaboration ElCOME to this, The Cochrane CDSR is published as part of The WCollaboration’s 2010 Annual Cochrane Library , and David Tovey, our Report. Recently I was at a party and Editor in Chief, has already made his mark involved in one of those “What do you here. With a brand-new website, and the do?” conversations. In a moment of move from January 2010 to monthly flippancy and bravado, I said that I was publication, our external presence – what privileged to be the CEO of “the world’s the public sees – is now looking more and most influential healthcare charity that more like one of the traditional journals I you’ve never heard of”. The moment mentioned above. Monthly publication passed, the conversation moved on. also has a knock-on effect on another way of measuring our impact: the amount Nick Royle And then I got to thinking. What do I of press coverage we receive. This has mean by ‘influential’? How do we increased significantly as our press measure our impact, and how well are we releases become more frequent and key doing? Well, at a very basic level, we see journalists become more familiar with our the ‘impact factor’ awarded to our main output, allowing more people to hear publication, the Cochrane Database of about us and what we do. Systematic Reviews (CDSR) . Blunt, simplistic, perhaps misleading: all valid But maybe our more important impact criticisms. But the fact remains that we story is the degree to which Cochrane now have an Impact Factor of 5.653, Reviews now form the bedrock for high- which places us 11th in the category quality clinical and practice guidelines ‘General Medicine’ out of the 132 journals globally. The first question for any panel included in the ISI Medicine, General and undertaking the task of creating or Internal journal list, up from our first entry updating a guideline, health technology for 2007 of 4.654 (14th). This is a appraisal, or indeed clinical trial or fantastic reflection on the achievement of systematic review, is increasingly, “Is there those visionaries who founded the a Cochrane Review relevant to this Collaboration, and of our authors, staff question?” and other contributors who make this In this Annual Report we’ve tried to give possible. Those above us in the list are all you a flavour of how Cochrane Reviews medical journals in the traditional sense, are being used, changing practice, and and pretty well known, so maybe my off- influencing decision-making. Around the the-cuff boast held a grain of truth. 8 Introductions world, in countries rich and poor, number, but it tells the world about the Cochrane Reviews matter. fantastic things that this amazing organisation does. My personal vision? That we achieve a top-five Impact Factor rating. It’s just a Nick Royle Read more about our Impact Factor on page 31 Nick and a delegate at the Annual General Meeting in 2009, considering questions arising from the 2008 –9 Strategic Review of the Collaboration 9 Cochrane Collaboration Annual Report 2009/10 From the Editor in Chief of The Cochrane Library N late 2008 I was offered the opportunity reviews, as Harriet Maclehose and I did Ito join The Cochrane Collaboration as when creating a ‘Browse by subject’ Editor in Chief of The Cochrane Library .