ME agenda

Myalgic Encephalomyelitis | political issues | information | commentary | for the UK ME patient community

Archive for the ‘ME Observatory’ Category

MEA: Summary Board of Trustees meeting 15 and 16 June 2008

Posted by meagenda on June 21, 2009

Summary of ME Association Board of Trustees meetings held on Mon 15 June and Tues 16 June, 2009

http://www.meassociation.org.uk/content/view/893/161/

This is a summary of key points to emerge from two meetings of The ME Association Board of Trustees. These meetings took place at our Head Office in Buckingham on Monday afternoon 15 June 2009 and on Tuesday morning 16 June 2009. Informal discussions also took place on a number of issues on the Monday evening.

After the Board meeting on Tuesday the charity’s AGM was held in the afternoon. Results of trustee elections were also announced. A brief summary of the AGM, along with the election results, and a short post-AGM Board meeting, is included at the end of this summary.

Please note that this is a summary of the Board meetings and AGM – not the official minutes.

The order of subjects below is not necessarily in the order that they were discussed.

PRESENT

Trustees:

Ewan Dale (ED) – Honorary Treasurer
Mark Douglas (MD)
Neil Riley (NR) – Chairman
Charles Shepherd (CS) – Honorary Medical Adviser
Barbara Stafford (BS)

Officials:

Gill Briody (GB) – Company Secretary
Tony Britton (TB) – Publicity Manager

Apologies:

Rick Osman (RO) – Vice Chairman

FINANCES

ED updated trustees on the current financial situation. Trustees then discussed the monthly accounts for the period up to April 2009. All of our main sources of income are holding steady and in some cases – ie donations and fundraising, literature sales, membership subscriptions – are slightly or significantly up on the same period last year. This is reassuring news given the difficult economic climate and the effect that this is having on the charity sector in general. Income for general funds is continuing to remain roughly in line with expenditure, despite the fall in interest rates on funds held. Trustees made some minor changes to banking arrangements in order to maximise interest rates on the various bank balances. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in CFS Clinics, CFS Clinics Inquiry, Countess of Mar, ME Association, ME Observatory, ME Research, ME events, ME in Parliament, MRC, NHS service provision inquiry, NICE, NICE CFS/ME guideline, Prof Holgate, Royal Society of Medicine | Comments Off

National ME Observatory: Where’s the website?

Posted by meagenda on April 3, 2009

AfME National ME Observatory: Where’s the website?

[The following has been posted on Action for M.E's forum, this morning.]

Yesterday (2 April), Norfolk newspaper edp24 published on its website a piece on today’s Observatory Workshop in Norwich at which:

See:  http://tinyurl.com/observatorynorwichworkshop

“Patients, health professionals and others interested in the conditions [...] will hear about the [National ME Observatory] findings so far and asked for their ideas about how the findings can be of most use to patients.”

2 April marks the start of Year 3 of the Observatory Project – the final year for which Big Lottery funding is being provided. It had been agreed with the BLF that certain tasks would be completed within certain years of the Project’s life.

*According to Page 6 of the BLF’s Grant Offer, dated 20 March 2006:

Agreed year 1 Tasks for Action for M.E. were:

  • Initiation of National ME Observatory collaboration, including media announcements in lay and professional media, and establishing communication links with the CFS/ME community.
  • Website will contain some information on support for social inclusion of people living with CFS/ME and their families in England.

Agreed year 2 Tasks for Action for M.E. were:

  • Expansion of web-based communication facilities for Observatory, in order to improve facilities for dissemination of the results of the project, and preparation of strategy for succession funding.
  • Workshops involving people benefiting from research.

Agreed year 3 Tasks for Action for M.E. were:

  • Dissemination of results through workshops reporting back to people with CFS/ME, conferences, publications, the media and web-based facilities, and submission of research proposals for further funding.

*In Table 10, Page 46, of Action for M.E.’s funding application document Establishing A Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS)/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) OBSERVATORY FOR SOCIALLY-INCLUSIVE EPIDEMIOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL RESEARCH INTO CFS/ME submitted to the Big Lottery Fund in 2005, a figure of £2000 was projected for “The internet-website for CFS/ME Observatory” for the dissemination of information to a target audience of “lay public, CFS/ME community, Professional, carers, Stakeholders”.

But no dedicated web facility for the dissemination of information about the Observatory Project was launched during Years 1 and 2 and the Project has now entered Year 3.

Action for M.E. has failed to set out lines of accountability for those responsible for the management of the Observatory Project and for the oversight of the spending of £500,000 of public money and make these available to its membership and to the wider public, either via a dedicated website, via web pages on its own website or through any other means; there is virtually no information available online around the work of the Observatory, including the names of those who sit on the Observatory Steering and Management Groups.

No channel of communication exists between the Project’s management and the public. No information is available online about the progress of the various epidemiological research studies being undertaken. Therefore, the operation of the Observatory Project, those responsible for it and the progress of the research studies being undertaken through it cannot be monitored by the public because this information is not available for public scrutiny.

With the Project entering Year 3, what is the reason for Action for M.E.’s failure to set up a website for the dissemination of information about the Observatory in accordance with Tasks agreed with its funding body, the BLF, in 2006?

*Information provided under Freedom of Information Act

Suzy Chapman

03 April 2009

Posted in AfME, Action for M.E., Freedom of Information, ME Observatory | Comments Off

Summary: Meeting, MEA Board of Trustees 17 March 2009

Posted by meagenda on March 21, 2009

Summary of meeting, ME Association Board of Trustees Tuesday, 17 March 2009

This is a summary of key points to emerge from a meeting of The ME Association Board of Trustees that took place at our Head Office in Buckingham on Tuesday 17 March 2009. Informal discussions also took place on a number of issues the night before. Please note that this is a summary of the Board meeting – not the official minutes.

The order of subjects below is not necessarily in the order that they were discussed.

PRESENT

Trustees:

Ewan Dale (ED) – Honorary Treasurer
Mark Douglas (MD)
Neil Riley (NR) – Chairman (by telephone link)
Charles Shepherd (CS) – Honorary Medical Adviser
Barbara Stafford (BS)

Officials:

Gill Briody (GB) – Company Secretary
Tony Britton (TB) – Publicity Manager

Apologies:

Rick Osman (RO) – Vice Chairman

FINANCES

ED updated trustees on the financial situation, including a discussion on the final monthly accounts for the year ending December 2008. Despite the very difficult economic climate for charities it was encouraging to note that income from subscriptions, gift aid, advertising, literature sales and general fundraising for 2008 was slightly up on 2007. Income for general funds was also roughly in line with expenditure.

However, like all charities we are now facing a situation where people are likely to be reducing the amount of money they are able or willing to give to the charity sector. At the same time, demand on our support and information services is increasing, and may well see a further significant increase once the government’s new welfare/benefit reforms start to take effect.

Trustees and staff agreed to continue to maintain very tight control over expenditure and to pursue the best rates of interest on money held in our reserve accounts – where there has been a very dramatic fall in income as a result of the base rate cuts over the past few months. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in APPG on ME, CBT/GET, CFS Clinics, CFS Clinics Inquiry, Countess of Mar, Invest in ME, Judicial Review, ME Association, ME Observatory, ME events, ME in Parliament, ME in children, MRC, NHS Plus, NHS service provision inquiry, NICE, NICE CFS/ME guideline, NICE Judicial Review, Prof Holgate, Royal Society of Medicine, Scottish Cross Party Group | Comments Off

Examples of concerns raised by professional bodies about the NICE (draft) Guideline CG53 on “CFS/ME”

Posted by meagenda on March 13, 2009

html version:  http://www.meactionuk.org.uk/Compilation_of_Professional_concerns.htm

Examples of concerns raised by professional bodies about the NICE (draft) Guideline CG53 on “CFS/ME”

by Margaret Williams  | 13 March 2009

In his Approved Judgment in the Judicial Review of the NICE Clinical Guideline 53 on “CFS/ME” released today, the Judge (Mr Justice Simon) stated:

“The circumstances are not such as to lead a fair minded and informed observer to conclude that there was a real risk of bias among the members of the GDG.”

Commenting on today’s Judgment, NICE’s Press Statement says: “Professor Peter Littlejohns, NICE Clinical and Public Health Director, responded to the High Court judgment saying…We are pleased that all members of the GDG and those involved in selecting the GDG were totally exonerated from the unfounded claims made against them”

http://www.nice.org.uk/media/001/6F/CFSMEJRJudgementStatement130309.pdf  ).

Read full document here on ME agenda: 14pp MS Word:  Compilation of Professional Concerns by Margaret Williams

Posted in AfME, Action for M.E., CBT, CBT/GET, CFS Clinics, Judicial Review, ME Observatory, ME Research UK, ME in the media, NHS Plus, NICE, NICE CFS/ME guideline, NICE Judicial Review, PACE Trials, PRIME Project, Professor Peter White, Simon Wessely | Comments Off

MEA: Summary Board of Trustees meeting: 27 January 2009

Posted by meagenda on January 31, 2009

Ed: The MEA has published a summary of its January meeting of the Association’s Board of Trustees. 

No update on the progress Dr Des Turner’s proposed APPG on ME inquiry into NHS service provision for people with ME is reported ( see previous posting: Next meeting of the APPG on ME ).

No date appears to have been set, yet, for a February meeting of the APPG on ME.

The summary informs that the second meeting of the MRC’s “Expert Group on ME/CFS Research” is planned for March.  The MRC advised me in January that revisions to the group’s Terms of Reference are anticipated to be agreed at this second meeting of the group and that a copy will be provided to me under the FOI Act as soon as the Terms of Reference are agreed.   A copy will be published here on ME agenda.

The web pages for the entry on “Chronic Fatigue Syndrome” on the NHS Choices website, referred to in the summary below, can be found here

——————–

ME Association | 30 January 2009

ME Association: Summary Board of Trustees meeting: 27 January 2009

This is a short summary of key points to emerge from a meeting of The ME Association Board of Trustees that took place at our Head Office in Buckingham on Tuesday 27 January 2009. Informal discussions also took place on a number of issues the night before.

Please note that this is a summary of the Board meeting – not the official minutes.

The order of subjects below is not necessarily in the order that they were discussed.

PRESENT

Trustees:

Ewan Dale (ED) – Honorary Treasurer
Neil Riley (NR) – Chairman (by telephone link)
Charles Shepherd (CS) – Honorary Medical Adviser

Officials:

Gill Briody (GB) – Company Secretary
Tony Britton (TB) – Publicity Manager

Apologies:
Mark Douglas (MD)
Rick Osman (RO) – Vice Chairman
Ba Stafford (BS)

FINANCES

ED reported that overall income from subscriptions, donations, gift aid and general fundraising for the year ending December 2008 has been roughly in line with expenditure, which included some significant additional items due to the Head Office move at the beginning of 2008. This is very encouraging given the major economic problems that started to emerge during the latter part of 2008. However, like all charities we are now facing a situation where people may be reducing the amount of money they are able or willing to give to the charity sector. And at the same time demand on our support and information services may well start to increase. Trustees agreed to continue to maintain a very tight control over expenditure and to secure the best rates of interest on money held in our unrestricted and restricted (ie research fund) reserve accounts – where there is going to be a significant fall in income as a result of the base rate cuts.

The annual stocktaking of literature and goods for sale has been successfully completed.

FUNDRAISING INITIATIVES

Amazon Walk to raise funds for a tissue and post-mortem bank: BS had sent in an email report on Ed Stafford’s progress on the Amazon Walk. Ed’s most recent blog posting comes from Milagos, Peru. He will shortly be collecting his visa for entry into Brazil – which makes about 3,000 km to go as the crow flies!. Progress can be followed on the Amazon Walk blog at www.walkingtheamazon.com . Ed’s fundraising page for ME research at JustGiving can be found at: http://www.justgiving.com/walkingtheamazonmeresearch . Just over £5,000 has been raised so far.

Mobile phone and ink cartridge returns and trolley coins Trolley coins can still be ordered using the pdf ORDER FORM on the MEA website (www.meassociation.org.uk) ,or the insert in the February issue of ME Essential magazine, or by phoning MEA Head Office: 01280 818964/818968.

Fundraising information TB produced a draft layout for our new fundraising information leaflet.

A number of other fundraising initiatives were discussed, including a decision to once again sell Christmas Cards in 2009. A number of possible designs were considered.

2009 AGM AND TRUSTEE ELECTIONS

Trustees agreed to a timetable for the 2009 AGM and trustee elections. The AGM will take place at Head Office in late June or early July. Trustees standing for election this year are Mark Douglas and Barbara Stafford. Further information on the AGM and trustee elections will appear in the February issue of ME Essential magazine.

We are very keen to hear from anyone who would like to discuss the possibility of joining the MEA as a trustee. Applications are welcome from people with ME, carers, and anyone who has skills which they feel could be of benefit to the charity. In order to proceed with an application, non members would have to become members of the MEA.

NICE JUDICIAL REVIEW

CS updated trustees on administrative arrangements for the NICE judicial review. The two day Hearing will take place in the High Court in London on 11 and 12 February 2009. A representative from the MEA will attend the Hearing. More information, as it comes in, will appear on MEA website:

http://www.meassociation.org.uk/content/blogcategory/30/161/

PARLIAMENTARY

APPG Inquiry into NHS Services CS reported on progress with the Inquiry that has been initiated by Dr Des Turner, Chairman of the APPG. Further information will appear on the MEA website news section as it becomes available.

APPG The next meeting of the APPG is intended to take place in February and it is hoped that there will be a presentation from Jonathan Shaw, Minister for Disabled People. As soon as a date becomes available it will appear on the MEA website news section. The minutes of the 8 October meeting can be found on the MEA website (news section archive).

Countess of Mar’s Group: FORWARD ME CS reported on the second meeting of this group that took place at the House of Lords on Tuesday 18 November. A website has been set up where information about the group and minutes from meetings are available. A summary of the November meeting will appear in the February issue of ME Essential magazine. Forward ME website: www.forward-me.org.uk

RESEARCH

Ramsay Research Fund (RRF) funding for Professor Julia Newton et al, University of Newcastle CS updated trustees on the new research study into muscle function in ME/CFS that was approved at the last Board meeting in November. Further information about this study can be found at the end of this summary.

ME Observatory Steering Group CS reported that the next Steering Group meeting will take place on Tuesday February 3.

Post-mortem tissue bank feasibility study CS reported that the next meeting of the Steering Group that is overseeing this new item of research that will be examining various aspects of how an ME/CFS specific tissue/post-mortem bank could be set up will take place on February 3rd. CS will also be having a separate meeting with the researchers on Monday 2 February. It was agreed that CS should visit one of the existing post-mortem/tissue banks in the UK to take this preparation forward.

Medical Research Council (MRC) Expert Group on ME/CFS Research CS updated trustees on the current situation regarding this group, which has been set up by Professor Stephen Holgate, and reported on the first meeting of the group that was held in London on 15 December. The MEA gave a presentation on the role of the charity sector in initiating and funding research. A summary of this meeting will appear in the February issue of ME Essential magazine. A further meeting is being planned for March.

Ramsay Research Fund constitution Trustees agreed to start work on a new constitution for the Ramsay Research Fund which will be more relevant to the current situation regarding ME/CFS research.

Application for funding in relation to post-mortem research Trustees discussed a new funding proposal that is awaiting ethical approval.

Other applications for research funding CS updated trustees on several other preliminary applications for research funding that have been received.

Practice nurses’ attitudes to cause and management of ME/CFS Trustees discussed the results of this recently published research paper, which indicates a very poor understanding of the pathological factors that may be involved in the causation of ME/CFS. Some of the nurses who were interviewed also displayed very negative or prejudicial views about people with ME/CFS. CS has written to members of the FORWARD ME Group to ask for a discussion on nurse education to be placed on the Agenda for the next meeting. The MEA has approached the Royal College of Nursing about ME/CFS education in the past and the results of this study indicate that we need to do so again. The full paper can be accessed via the news section (January 2009 archive) of the MEA website.

SCOTTISH CLINICAL GUIDELINES

ED reported on the current state of progress relating to the development of clinical guidance for doctors in Scotland – a document that is partly being based on the content of the MEA purple booklet for health professionals: ‘ME/CFS/PVFS – An Exploration of the Key Clinical Issues – and the Public Health Needs Assessment. The timescale for both projects has had to be re-organised with redrafted documents relating to both initiatives coming out in February for further stakeholder consultation. The aim is to achieve publication during ME Awareness Week in May.

NHS DIRECT

TB reported on a meeting he had attended on January 20th of the NHS Direct Access Issues Group at NHS Direct HQ, where the possibility of MEA involvement in future work on chronic and long term conditions was mentioned. TB has been invited to give a presentation to the group at their next meeting in April. We are also working with NHS Choices on a video about ME/CFS.

MEA ANNUAL MEDICAL MEETING

Trustees discussed arrangements for the 2009 Annual Medical Meeting. CS is going to contact local groups to see if anyone would like to co-operate with us in the way that the Colchester Group did for the 2008 meeting.

OTHER ME/CFS MEETINGS

Royal Society of Medicine CS reported on arrangements for the patient meeting in the ‘Medicine and ME’ series that will be held at the Royal Society of Medicine on Saturday 11 July. More information on this meeting, including how to apply to attend, can be found in the February issue of ME Essential magazine.

Invest in ME Conference Trustees agreed to both TB and CS attending this conference in May. We are also going to ask the organisers if the MEA can have a display stand at the conference.

MEA MANAGEMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

TB updated trustees on the analysis of data from around 3500 on-line questionnaires and 750 paper questionnaires. The overall response makes this the largest ever survey of public opinion about management issues that has ever been undertaken here in the UK, possibly in the world. A comprehensive summary of the results will appear in the February issue of ME Essential magazine and it was agreed to start work on the preparation of a more substantial report which summarises and comments on the results. All of the relevant patient feedback will be passed to the APPG Inquiry into NHS Services.

MEA LITERATURE

A new information leaflet on PHI/permanent health insurance will shortly be made available.

MEA literature can be obtained using the pdf ORDER FORM on the MEA website: www.meassociation.org.uk, or the 8 page order form insert in the February issue of ME Essential magazine, or by phoning Head Office on 01280 818064/818968.

MEA WEBSITE

The new regular on-line survey feature has proved to be very popular. So far, we have surveyed public opinion on reactions to flu vaccination (November); the NICE guideline on ME/CFS (December) and post-mortem research (February). Trustees considered various options for future questions. The February survey will be allow people to comment on how satisffied they are with the NHS management of their ME/CFS. Results from current and past on-line surveys can be found on the MEA website.

It was agreed to update the section on alternative and complementary therapies.

ME CONNECT

Trustees discussed whether ME Connect Helpline could also be linked in to NHS services and given publicity by the ME/CFS clinics.

ME ESSENTIAL MAGAZINE

TB reported on the content of the February issue of ME Essential. This will be sent out to members towards the end of the month. It was agreed to produce a survey form for people to comment on the content of the magazine – in particular the not always easy task of achieving the right balance between serious news and medical information and ‘lighter’ human interest features.

DATE OF NEXT MEETING

Provisionally fixed for Tuesday 17 March 2009

Summary prepared by Dr Charles Shepherd
MEA trustee

ADDENDUM

Further information on new MEA funded research into muscle energy metabolism:

Professor Julia Newton and colleagues at the University of Newcastle have been investigating the role of autonomic system dysfunction in ME/CFS and several papers from her research group relating to these findings have now been published. Professor Newton has also been looking at possible explanations for the sometimes quite disabling fatigue that is reported by people with primary biliary cirrhosis. The main emphasis of the new study being funded by the ME Association’s Ramsay Research Fund will be to look at whether there is a peripheral (ie muscular) component to exercise-induced fatigue in ME/CFS by examining how skeletal muscle produces lactic acid during exercise and then removes the acid during the recovery phase. The proposed study will take forward findings from small studies that have already examined this aspect of muscle function. Some of these studies indicate that there is a defect in muscle energy metabolism/production, possibly due to mitochondrial dysfunction, that cannot be explained by the deconditioning/inactivity model – at least in a sub-group of people with ME/CFS.

MEA website

ENDS

Posted in APPG on ME, CFS Clinics, CFS Clinics Inquiry, Countess of Mar, Invest in ME, Judicial Review, ME Association, ME Observatory, ME events, ME in Parliament, MRC, NHS service provision inquiry, NICE, NICE CFS/ME guideline, NICE Judicial Review, Royal Society of Medicine | Comments Off

Does Action for ME operate openly and is it fulfilling its obligations to the Big Lottery Fund?

Posted by meagenda on January 12, 2009

Can Action for ME be said to be operating openly and democratically and is it fulfilling its obligations to the Big Lottery Fund?

As issues around the AfME National ME Observatory are currently being debated, it may be useful to revisit a posting from last year; this is prefaced with commentary on just one aspect of Action for ME’s management of the National ME Observatory Project:

Action for ME has yet to fulfil its obligation to the Big Lottery Fund to create a website or dedicated webpages for the purpose of communicating with the public, professionals and the ME community and for disseminating reports and results on the various projects being undertaken and for the publication of other information relating to the operation of the Observatory.

Even basic information such as the names of members of the Observatory Steering, Management and Reference Groups and other individuals or organisations involved in this Project, the organisations these individuals represent and their function within the Project Groups or within the Observatory Project as a whole, is still not publicly available and has not been published on Action for ME’s website or on a dedicated website.

[The following information taken from documents provided by the Big Lottery Fund under FOI Act.]

Total grant awarded by the Big Lottery Fund to Action for ME in March 2006 was £503,028

The revised yearly breakdown, as it stood on 1 November 2007, was:

Year One  £213,105
Year Two  £171,644
Year Three  £118,279

Of this, £23,120 has been allocated for “Publicity and dissemination“, broken down over three years:

Year One  £8,000
Year Two  £7,300
Year Three  £7,820

During the application assessment process, it had been agreed with the Big Lottery Fund that the Project would carry out certain tasks in each year of the grant.

Extract Page 6, Grant Offer, taken from document provided by the Big Lottery Fund under FOI Act:

Page 6: Project tasks

During the assessment of your application we agreed that your project would deliver certain tasks during each year of the grant.

We will ask you to report on how far you have met these each year.  For more details of this see ‘Monitoring your grant’ on pages 10-13 of your Grant offer pack.  The tasks that we agreed are as follows:

Year One – Action for ME

  • Initiation of National ME Observatory collaboration, including media announcements in lay and professional media, and establishing communication links with the CFS/ME community.
  • Website will contain some information on support for social inclusion of people living with CFS/ME and their families in England.

Year One – University of East Anglia, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, University of Hull

  • Report of main findings of the systematic review of support for social inclusion of people with CFS/ME in England.
  • Initial report of the pilot of disease register for CFS/ME.

Year Two – Action for ME

  • Expansion of web-based communication facilities for Observatory, in order to improve facilities for dissemination of the results of the project, and preparation of strategy for succession funding.
  • Workshops involving people benefiting from research.

Year Two – University of East Anglia, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, University of Hull

  • Descriptive epidemiological study: completion of patients recruitment.
  • Report of main findings of quality studies (studies IV, V and VI)

Year Three – Action for ME

  • Dissemination of results through workshops reporting back to people with CFS/ME, conferences, publications, the media and web-based facilities, and submission of research proposals for further funding.

Year Three – University of East Anglia, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, University of Hull

  • Descriptive epidemiological study: report of main findings
  • Disease register: evaluation of pilot study and complete proposal for extension of register.


In Table 10, Page 46, of Action for ME’s funding application document “Establishing A Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS)/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) OBSERVATORY FOR SOCIALLY-INCLUSIVE EPIDEMIOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL RESEARCH INTO CFS/ME” submitted to the Big Lottery Fund in 2005, a figure of £2000 was projected for “The internet-website for CFS/ME Observatory” for the dissemination of information to a target audience of “lay public, CFS/ME community, Professional, carers, Stakeholders” with the delivery date given as the second and third years.

On 6 November 2007, the Big Lottery Fund Grant Officer had written to Dr Trish Taylor, CCd to Sir Peter Spencer, requesting an interim monitoring report detailing progress to date against agreed tasks and any changes to the project that may have occurred.  In particular, comments on the project tasks for year one were requested. 

According to the document “National M.E. Observatory Long Term Strategy to Funding, Derek Pheby, 14 September 2007″, work on the three year programme had begun in April 2007.  In 2008, the Observatory Project would have entered Year Two –  in which “Expansion of web-based communication facilities for Observatory, in order to improve facilities for dissemination of the results of the project, and preparation of strategy for succession funding” had been an agreed task. 

The Project will shortly be entering Year Three and Action for ME are significantly behind schedule over the creation of the website/webpages for the dissemination of information relating to the Observatory.

In late November 2008, Action for ME’s Heather Walker advised one enquirer that “The Observatory will have web pages accessible via Action for M.E.’s website” and that these are being produced by Action for ME’s IT Manager in association with the University of East Anglia but there is still no web presence for the Observatory.

How much longer is it going to take Action for ME to fulfil this requirement of their grant award?

Is the Big Lottery Fund Grant Officer aware that no website for the dissemination of information about this project is in operation; that AfME has failed to set out lines of accountability for those responsible for the management of this project and for the oversight of the spending of £500,000 of public money and that no channel of communication exists between the project’s management and the public because this has yet to be facilitated?  Therefore the operation and progress of this project and those responsible for it cannot be monitored by the public because this information is not available for public scrutiny.

————————

Disclosure by AfME of the composition of the Steering and Management Groups for the National ME Observatory
[First published on ME agenda on 29 October 2008]

“The irony of this is, that as a result of AfME and the Observatory Project Group Co-ordinator’s decision not to place the information I had requested in the public domain the result has been that I have actually ended up with a vast bundle of stuff – the research proposal application documents, the research project costings, copies of the three independent expert review reports, the business plan, the research agreement, variation reports, copies of letters and emails between AfME/Observatory Project personnel and The Big Lottery Fund, internal and external correspondence relating to applications submitted by other individuals under FOI for information about the Observatory Project; staff costings, job specs, costings for equipment, travel, workshops, conference attendance, translations, transcriptions, video equipment, printing, consumables, development of a website…” 

AfME finally coughs up with a list of names!

I’d like to set the following on record:

On 1 October 2007, I first contacted Dr Derek Pheby, AfME National Observatory Project Co-ordinator, (CCd to AfME’s Sara Brooks):

I wrote:

“Following the 16 June meeting of The ME Association Board of Trustees, Dr Charles Shepherd published a summary of key points emerging at that meeting. In his summary, Dr Shepherd writes:

‘A meeting of the ME Observatory Steering Group took place on the same day. As this clashed with the Board meeting, the MEA could not, unfortunately, be represented.’

To the best of my knowledge, The ME Association has not made any announcement to this effect, but I assume from what Dr Shepherd has written in his summary that a representative of the ME Association, possibly Dr Shepherd, himself, has been appointed to the ME Observatory Steering Group.

Issue 61 of AfME’s InterAction magazine carries an update on the National Research Observatory which includes a list of lay members appointed to the Steering Group and a list of those appointed to a Reference Group but there is no mention of Dr Shepherd’s appointment or of any others who may have been appointed over and above lay members.

I would like to make a formal request for the following information:

1] Have any other representatives of national ME patient organisations (other than the MEA and AfME’s own staff and Trustees) been allocated seats on the Steering Group and through what process were these seats allocated?

2] Other than any ME patient organisations, have any other organisations or individuals (other than those specifically named lay individuals that comprise the Steering and Reference Groups and are named as such in InterAction) been allocated seats on the Steering, Management or any other group or groups that comprise the Observatory Project and through what process were these seats allocated?

3] Would you please provide a complete list of members of:

The Steering Group (both lay and professional)
The Management Group
The Reference group
Any other individuals or organisations involved in this Project

The list to include:

Name of individual
Organisation Represented (where appropriate)
Function within Project Group or within Project as a whole

Contact details for individuals/organisations are not required.

If a Line Management organisational chart has been produced then a copy of this would also be welcomed.”

Apart from confirming that Dr Shepherd (MEA) did indeed hold a seat on the Steering Group, Dr Pheby provided no responses to these questions, stating that “Those lay members who were appointed as a result of the exercise all consented to have that fact reported in Interaction. We were obliged to seek that consent as a result of our obligations under the Data Protection Act, which restricts what further information we can disclose about other participants in the project whose consent to disclosure has not at this stage been sought.”

Dr Pheby evidently had no inclination to obtain consent in order to release a list of names to me nor did he appear to consider that the information I had requested should already have been placed in the public domain.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in AfME, Action for M.E., Freedom of Information, ME Alliance, ME Association, ME Observatory, MRC, PRIME Project | Comments Off

FOI Request: MRC CFS/ME multi-disciplinary panel members list

Posted by meagenda on December 12, 2008

Freedom of Information Request: MRC CFS/ME multi-disciplinary panel members list

20 working days ago, I submitted a second FOI request to the MRC raising a number of questions of them, including a request for a list of the members of the MRC’s new multi-disciplinary panel.  This request was fulfilled, today, by the MRC.

Note: The MRC states that there are currently no representatives of “other interested parties” who have an involvement with this new MRC CFS/ME Expert Group. It’s not clear from Ms Parker’s responses, today, whether the MRC still intends to invite or accept applications from “other interested parties” in addition to the two representatives for AfME and the ME Association who have already been appointed to this panel, nor on what basis “other interested parties” might have an involvement.

(I had been advised by the MRC on 27 May, that “The members of the panel will be appointed by invitation, and membership will include leading experts in a number of fields including neuroscience, immunology, toxicology, imaging, psychology and psychiatry and will involve other interested parties”.)

PDF for CFS/ME expert group membership

cfs_me-expert-group-membership [18KB]

[List of members also appended as text.  MRC responses in blue.]

MRC

12 December 2008

Freedom of Information Request

Thank you for your request under the Freedom of Information Act in which you ask for an update on the questions you asked earlier in the year. The membership of the Panel and the arrangements for the first meeting have only recently been finalised. As noted in our response to your initial question information relating to the Panel will be published on our website in due course.

In your request of 16 November you have asked a number of questions relating to the membership and work of the new MRC CFS/ME Expert Group, the MRC’s responses follow your questions;

1] The names of all individuals appointed to date to the MRC CFS/ME multi-disciplinary panel, and their medical, or other, discipline.

A copy of the membership list for the CFS/ME Expert Group, including affiliations is attached. This membership list, which has only recently been finalised, will be published on the MRC website in due course.

2] Has an initial meeting of the panel taken place since my request for information on 25 April, and what was the date of this meeting?

There have been no meetings of the Expert Group to date. The first meeting will take place on Monday 15 December.

3] Has a Terms of Reference been drawn up?

The terms of reference will be discussed at the first meeting of the Expert Group on 15 December and will be agreed following that meeting.

4] I request a copy of the Terms of Reference.

The agreed terms of reference will be published on the MRC website. We will also send you a copy of the terms of reference when they have been finalised.

5] I request the names of any individuals and, where appropriate, the names of the organisations they represent, who have been invited to give presentations in relation to a CFS/ME multi-disciplinary panel as “other interested parties”.

6] I request the names of any individuals and, where appropriate, the names of the organisations they represent, who have already given presentations in relation to a CFS/ME multi-disciplinary panel as “other interested parties” and the dates on which these presentations took place.

Only members of the Panel, as listed in the attached document, have been invited to attend the meeting on 15 December. No representatives of “other interested parties” have been asked to give, or to submit presentations to that meeting.

7] I request the names of any individuals and, where appropriate, the names of the organisations they represent, who have already been appointed as representatives of “other interested parties” who are to have an involvement with the CFS/ME multi-disciplinary panel.

As noted at 1] above the membership of the panel has only recently been finalised, this is shown in the attached paper and will shortly be available on the MRC’s website. No other representatives or “other interested parties” have been appointed to the Expert Group, or have been invited to attend the meeting.

8] Ms Raymond has advised that, once finalised, the membership of the panel will be published on the MRC website. Does the MRC also intend to publish a list of the names of the individuals and, where appropriate, the names of the organisations they represent, appointed as representatives of “other interested parties” who have an involvement with the CFS/ME multi-disciplinary panel on the MRC website?

There are currently no representatives of “other interested parties” who have an involvement with the MRC CFS/ME Expert Group.

I hope that you are satisfied that your request has been handled appropriately. If not, you may appeal using the MRC’s complaints procedure. Details are on the MRC website at:
www.mrc.ac.uk/index/about/about-contact/about-complaints_procedure.htm ,
alternatively you may contact the MRC Complaints Officer by email at
customer.service@headoffice.mrc.ac.uk or write to The Complaints Officer, Medical Research Council, 20 Park Crescent, London W1B 1AL.

If, following the Complaints Officer’s reply, you remain dissatisfied; you may contact the Information Commissioner. Details of how to take your complaint further are at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk .

Yours sincerely,

Rosa Parker | Corporate Governance and Policy

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Ed: I have added in square brackets the professional specialities for those whose names may be unfamiliar to the ME community.]

From PDF as supplied by MRC:

CFS/ME expert group membership

Professor Stephen Holgate – University of Southampton – Chairman

[Professor Holgate chairs the research committee of the CFS Research Foundation and chairs or sits on other MRC committees.]

Professor Jill Belch – University of Dundee

Dr Esther Crawley – University of Bristol

Professor Philip Cowen – University of Oxford

[Ed: Philip Cowen is Professor of Psychopharmacology and MRC Clinical Scientist at the University of Oxford. His research and clinical interests are in the biochemistry and treatment of mood disorders, and particularly the pharmacological management of resistant depression.]

Professor Malcolm Jackson – University of Liverpool

[Ed: Head, Division of Metabolic and Cellular Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences.]

Dr Jonathon Kerr – St George’s University of London

Professor Ian Kimber – University of Manchester

[Ed: Professor and Chair of Toxicology, UK Medical Research Council (MRC) Training and Career Development Board, Special Advisor to the MRC on Industrial Liaison]

Professor Hugh Perry – University of Southampton

[Ed: School of Biological Sciences, Professor of Experimental Neuropathology and Director of Research: Acute brain injury, Neurological disease]

Dr Derek Pheby – National CFS/ME Observatory

Professor Anthony Pinching – Pennisula [sic] Medical School

Dr Charles Shepherd – ME Association

Sir Peter Spencer – Action for ME

Professor Peter White – Bart’s and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry

[Ed: Senior lecturer and honorary consultant in psychological medicine. Specialty: Liaison psychiatry]

To be published on the MRC website www.mrc.ac.uk

Posted in AfME, Action for M.E., Freedom of Information, ME Association, ME Observatory, MRC, Prof Holgate, Professor Peter White | Comments Off

Parry, PRIME, Minervation and the ME Observatory

Posted by meagenda on November 16, 2008

Update:  The comment facility for this article on the Times website is premoderated and restricted to just 300 characters.  I have left the following comment this morning which is awaiting moderation:

“This misrepresents the status of the PRIME Project.  It was initiated and funded by GUS Charitable Trust (£320,000) of which Ms Parry is the Administrator.  It is managed by Crowe Associates and Minervation.  Its Steering Group includes patient reps but PRIME created and owns the website and forum.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

May be reposted

Parry, PRIME, Minervation and the ME Observatory

On Saturday 15 November, there was a two page article on Page 10 of the Body & Soul section of the Times by Vivienne Parry around internet forums and medical information sites.

The full article can be read on the Times site, here

In this article, Vivienne Parry writes: “Similarly, the patient-led website www.prime-cfs.org  is also used by medical professionals. This site was set up by a group of patient support groups to allow information about the experiences and concerns of people with ME/CFS to be accessed by medical researchers. By doing this they hoped researchers would better understand this misunderstood condition.”

This misrepresents the status of the PRIME Project.

The PRIME Project was initiated and funded by GUS (£320,000).  The PRIME Project is managed by Crowe Associates.  Vivienne Parry is the administrator of the GUS Charitable Trust so she knows all about PRIME and she also attended an initial PRIME meeting, following which a Steering Group was put together.

The PRIME Project appointed patient group reps and other interested parties to sit on its Steering Group but the PRIME website had already been conceived by PRIME in conjunction with Minervation (Douglas Badenoch) prior to the formation of the Steering Group.  It is PRIME that “owns” the PRIME Project and it is PRIME that “owns” the PRIME website.

The site was not set up by “a group of patient support groups” as Ms Parry has stated and neither was the PRIME Project, itself - the Project was initiated by its funders, GUS, who appointed management consultancy Crowe Associates to manage the Project.

The PRIME website hosts a forum which is owned, managed and moderated by PRIME in conjunction with Minervation’s Douglas Badenoch who has performed the role of moderator (and may still be moderating) the PRIME forum.

As the author of the piece, Ms Parry does not declare a professional interest in the PRIME Project.

Further on in the article, Ms Parry has also written: “However, some sites have started their own schemes, such as the site www.prostate-link.org.uk. This is a great example of what collective patient action can achieve.”

Prostate Cancer Charter for Action which hosts the “Prostate Link” forum is, according to its website, “a collaboration between the key voluntary sector and professional groups with a commitment to tackling prostate cancer.” 

PCCA was initiated, funded and facilitated by the GUS Charitable Trust of which Ms Parry, as already stated, is the administrator.

I thought the website of Prostate Link had a rather familiar feel to it - the site was also created by Minervation.

Sally Crowe (Crowe Associates, PRIME), Douglas Badenoch (Minervation) and Dr Kirstie Haywood, RCN Institute (worked on PRIME) are all involved in the AfME National Observatory Project.

Ms Crowe and Ms Haywood hold seats on the Observatory Steering Group. Douglas Badenoch is listed under “Others involved in the project”.

Why is Douglas Badenoch involved in the Observatory? Mr Badenoch confirmed to me in December 2007:

“Sally Crowe and I both sit on the steering group of the Observatory; this is a reciprocal arrangement.”

when asked to explain “reciprocal”, he wrote:

“Derek Pheby from the Observatory sits on PRIME’s advisory group; that’s what I mean by “reciprocal”. Both projects wanted to make sure that we learned from each other and didn’t duplicate any efforts.”

But what specific role does Minervation/Badenoch fulfil within the Observatory?

One of the tasks for year one of the AfME National ME Observatory Project was to set up a website for information about the Observatory. This requirement of the Big Lottery Fund has yet to be fulfilled.

Is the website going to be created and maintained by Minervation?

In the summary of the November ME Association Board of Trustees meeting, Charles Shepherd writes:

“[Observatory] Among the items discussed was a proposal to hold some public meetings next year where the work of the MEO could be presented. The next Steering Group meeting will take place in January 2009.”

Are Sally Crowe Associates/Minervation going to be involved in facilitating these public meetings on behalf of AfME?

If and when the Observatory website is set up, if it is managed by Minervation, what function might Minervation perform as a gateway for communication and interaction between the ME community and the Observatory?  Users of the PRIME forum have reported problems with censorious moderation of their postings and a lack of transparency from those involved in the management of the PRIME Project who participate in discussions and respond to questions, queries and comments from members of the public via the PRIME forum.

It has already proved difficult to communicate with the Observatory and to obtain information about the Observatory Project.  For example, AfME has only very recently released the names of those on the Observatory Steering and Management Groups – Dr Derek Pheby (AfME Observatory Project Co-ordinator) was not prepared to release these to me in October 2007.

Will Dr Pheby or AfME be prepared to confirm what role Minervation plays in the management of the Observatory project, when the Observatory website will be launched and who will be responsible for its management?

The full article by Vivienne Parry can be read here:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article5154795.ece

November 15, 2008

Should you trust health advice from internet forums? 

There are internet forums for all kinds of illness. We explore whether you can rely the advice and information you can get from these sites

by Vivienne Parry

Posted in AfME, Action for M.E., ME Observatory, ME in the media, PRIME Project | Leave a Comment »

Disclosure by AfME of composition of National ME Observatory Steering and Management Groups

Posted by meagenda on October 29, 2008

Disclosure by AfME of the composition of the Steering and Management Groups for the National ME Observatory

AfME finally coughs up with a list of names!

I’d like to set the following on record:

On 1 October 2007, I first contacted Dr Derek Pheby, AfME National Observatory Project Co-ordinator, (CCd to AfME’s Sara Brooks):

I wrote:

“Following the 16 June meeting of The ME Association Board of Trustees, Dr Charles Shepherd published a summary of key points emerging at that meeting. In his summary, Dr Shepherd writes:

‘A meeting of the ME Observatory Steering Group took place on the same day. As this clashed with the Board meeting, the MEA could not, unfortunately, be represented.’

To the best of my knowledge, The ME Association has not made any announcement to this effect, but I assume from what Dr Shepherd has written in his summary that a representative of the ME Association, possibly Dr Shepherd, himself, has been appointed to the ME Observatory Steering Group.

Issue 61 of AfME’s InterAction magazine carries an update on the National Research Observatory which includes a list of lay members appointed to the Steering Group and a list of those appointed to a Reference Group but there is no mention of Dr Shepherd’s appointment or of any others who may have been appointed over and above lay members.

I would like to make a formal request for the following information:

1] Have any other representatives of national ME patient organisations (other than the MEA and AfME’s own staff and Trustees) been allocated seats on the Steering Group and through what process were these seats allocated?

2] Other than any ME patient organisations, have any other organisations or individuals (other than those specifically named lay individuals that comprise the Steering and Reference Groups and are named as such in InterAction) been allocated seats on the Steering, Management or any other group or groups that comprise the Observatory Project and through what process were these seats allocated?

3] Would you please provide a complete list of members of:

The Steering Group (both lay and professional)
The Management Group
The Reference group
Any other individuals or organisations involved in this Project

The list to include:

Name of individual
Organisation Represented (where appropriate)
Function within Project Group or within Project as a whole

Contact details for individuals/organisations are not required.

If a Line Management organisational chart has been produced then a copy of this would also be welcomed.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Apart from confirming that Dr Shepherd (MEA) did indeed hold a seat on the Steering Group, Dr Pheby provided no responses to these questions, stating that “Those lay members who were appointed as a result of the exercise all consented to have that fact reported in Interaction. We were obliged to seek that consent as a result of our obligations under the Data Protection Act, which restricts what further information we can disclose about other participants in the project whose consent to disclosure has not at this stage been sought.”

Dr Pheby evidently had no inclination to obtain consent in order to release a list of names to me nor did he appear to consider that the information I had requested should already have been placed in the public domain.

On 11 October 2007, I wrote again to Dr Pheby, this time copying in Sir Peter Spencer (CEO AfME), and requested this information under the FOI Act. Receiving no response from either Dr Pheby or Sir Peter, I wrote again on 2 November.

This did evoke the following response from Dr Pheby which he had CCd to Sir Peter Spencer:

“Thank you for your further message. I apologise for my oversight in not having replied to you until now. I note that you requested some information regarding the National ME Observatory Steering Group, and invoked the Freedom of Information Act in support of your request. It should be noted that charities do not actually fall within the scope of the Freedom of Information Act.”

That is all he has to say.

On 6 November, I decided to approach Sir Peter Spencer, directly, (CCd to Dr Derek Pheby and to AfME’s Sara Brooks and George Armstrong):

I wrote:

“The Observatory is a separate organisation which is an amalgamation of academic institutions, the Lotteries Board and Action for ME. The Freedom of Information Act applies to government bodies such as academic institutions and the Lotteries Board. Additionally, the Observatory is spending half a million pounds of public money and is accountable to the public for the manner in which that money is spent and it is expected to be open to public scrutiny, through the FOI Act.

I am deeply concerned that as Project Co-ordinator, Dr Pheby evidently does not feel the Observatory should be open to scrutiny and that the Observatory (and by extension, AfME) seek to operate with a lack of transparency and without due regard for the requirements and ethos of the FOI Act. It is remarkable that AfME would appear to be supporting Dr Pheby in his evident desire to deny AfME members knowledge of who comprise the various Steering and Management Groups which share responsibility for supervision and management of this major project.

I shall be contacting The Big Lottery Fund Grants Officer with responsibility for the Observatory Project with my concerns about the Observatory and AfME’s handling of this matter, forthwith, and submitting a request for this information to be provided under FOI, by the Lotteries Board.

I wish to extend to you one last opportunity to provide the information I have requested and which I append [...] below.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I received neither the courtesy of an acknowledgement nor a reply from Sir Peter Spencer and on 9 November 2007, I put in an FOI request for this information to The Big Lottery Fund.

I was advised by The Big Lottery Fund that they did not hold the information I had applied for and that they were under no obligation to request information from an organisation to enable a member of the public to access it, but that this information might, in any case, be subject to Section 12, and to Section 40(2) of the Data Protection Act relating to personal information.

Around this time, I also submitted an FOI for the same information to the University of York (CCd as a matter of courtesy to Professor Peter Campion) and also to the University of East Anglia – both universities being partners with AfME in the Observatory Project. Both institutions replied that they did not hold this information on file.

Professor Campion also responded to my communication, commenting that as a member of the Steering Group, himself, he expected that its activities would be as transparent and accountable as is proper for any such body and that as a researcher, he expected total confidentiality to be available to all research participants, and also that researchers themselves were not exposed to any personal risk as has happened to medical researchers, as he was sure I was aware.

Quite what “personal risk” Professor Campion perceives researchers engaged in Observatory projects might be exposed to isn’t clear nor does he elaborate on what basis he has for his apparent concerns.

I wrote again to The Big Lottery Fund expressing my concerns that the Observatory Project Co-ordinator and AfME were not operating transparently.

On 4 December, The Big Lottery Fund wrote to me with a proposition:

Since they were unable to fulfil my request because a) they did not hold all of the information I had requested; b) they estimated that the cost of compiling the information in order to comply with the request would exceed the appropriate limit and c) if the information were held by them, it could also be subject to section 40(2) relating to personal information and may not be released for that reason, that rather than respond to my individual questions they were offering to send me instead a considerable body of material which they were in the process of releasing to another individual following a separate request under FOI and that this bundle would include the initial grant application, the business plan and their correspondence with AfME.

Well, I wasn’t going to say No, was I?

So for the past 10 months, I have been sitting quite legitimately on some 450 odd sides of A4 photocopies which represent much of the file that The Big Lottery Fund were holding on AfME and the Observatory Project at November 2007 – it’s a couple of inches thick.

A number of pages were identified as having been omitted which had contained CVs and personal contact details. I was also advised that The Big Lottery Fund’s internal assessment processes, and data such as bank account details had also been left out.  Some names and contact details had evidently been blacked out before photocopying, but otherwise I was given to understand that little else was being withheld from this very large bundle of documents and correspondence.

The irony of this is, that as a result of AfME and the Observatory Project Group Co-ordinator’s decision not to place the information I had requested in the public domain (set out at the top of this report) the result has been that I have actually ended up with a vast bundle of stuff – the research proposal application documents, the research project costings, copies of the three independent expert review reports, the business plan, the research agreement, variation reports, copies of letters and emails between AfME/Observatory Project personnel and The Big Lottery Fund, internal and external correspondence relating to applications submitted by other individuals under FOI for information about the Observatory Project; staff costings, job specs, costings for equipment, travel, workshops, conference attendance, translations, transcriptions, video equipment, printing, consumables, development of a website, copies of invoices for PCs, printers, software, and various other documents provided by AfME and the academic institutions working in partnership with the Observatory Project like accounts, governing documents and charters…and what a fascinating read it is!

The Big Lottery Fund also held a copy of the ONE CLICK AfME Dossier on file.

At least two other individuals are known to be holding this material under FOI.

The names of some of those from the academic institutions involved in the Observatory Project – Pheby, Campion, Lacerda, Leite, Chia, Nacul, Howe  had already been published by AfME in its magazine or were evident from university and AfME press releases, from university websites or from UEA adverts for research volunteers. The bundle revealed that Professor Leslie Findley (National ME Centre) was not only a member of the Observatory Steering Group but that he had also been one of the three independent expert reviewers of the research proposal – so there was another name to add to the list which AfME had yet to make public.

Dr Charles Shepherd (MEA) had already let slip that he had a seat on the Steering Group. But it was not evident whether reps for AYME or The Young ME Sufferers Trust (or any other patient organisation) also had seats, since Dr Pheby and Sir Peter Spencer had been unwilling to clarify and since the bundle provided by The Big Lottery Fund did not include copies of minutes for Project Steering Group and Observatory member meetings nor a directory of Steering and Observatory Group members and others involved in the Project.

Douglas Badenoch (Minervation/PRIME) had been quite happy to confirm to me, last December, that Sally Crowe and an associate had been allocated seats on the Steering Group and that he also had an involvement, himself – PRIME’s involvement with the Observatory had been alluded to in a PRIME newsletter, so that was an easy line of enquiry. Some other names can be derived from the bundle of Observatory related documentation that’s sitting in two A4 files beside me.

Amongst the correspondence, I noticed that the Lottery Fund Grants Officer had written to AfME on 6 November 2007 requesting certain information to be provided to them by 23 November – this to include an interim monitoring report on the project tasks for year one and a request that the following documents were also submitted:

. Minutes from meetings held to date between Action for M.E., the project steering group and observatory members.
. A list of members of the project steering group.
. A list of members of the Observatory.

On 25 June 2008, I wrote again to The Big Lottery Fund that I had been advised by them on 4 and 12 December that they did not hold all of the information I had requested in my original FOI application but that it was evident from correspondence included in the bundle they had sent to me that the BLF Grants Officer had written to Dr Trish Taylor on 6 November 2007, CCd to Sir Peter Spencer, requesting certain documents.

Under FOI, I requested confirmation of whether AfME had fulfilled the request to provide the Big Lottery Fund with a) A list of members of the project steering group, b) A list of members of the Observatory, and the date on which this request was fulfilled.

On 1 July 2008, Robert Holland, Head of Corporate Governance, Big Lottery Fund confirmed that Action for ME had complied with this request on 3 December 2007.

It appears then, that when The Big Lottery Fund wrote to me on 4 and 12 December they were now holding on file some of the information that I had requested, the previous month.

I have had no further correspondence with The Big Lottery Fund or with AfME or with Dr Pheby, the Project Co-ordinator, over these matters.

I’d like to remind readers that by the end of 2007, the 16 members of the Observatory’s Reference Group were also being denied knowledge of the names of the members of the Steering Group and members of the Observatory to which they had anticipated they would be relating; lines of management accountability had not been set out for them, either. They were also being denied copies of minutes of Steering Group meetings which had already taken place – effectively, the Project’s Reference Group were groping around in the dark and had become largely tokenistic as regards input and influence.

Whilst Action for ME evidently has no qualms about publishing the names of the six lay members recruited to the Project’s Steering Group (together with their biographical details) and also the names of the 16 or 17 individuals recruited to the Reference Group in its membership magazine, InterAction, it has continued to deny its membership, the wider ME patient community and the public the names of those individuals who comprise the various Steering and Management Groups which share responsibility for the oversight of this major project. No line management organisational chart has been published and there is still no website or dedicated web pages for the Observatory Project up online – which had been a project task for year one.

Therefore, it is not possible for stakeholders like myself or for the general public to establish with whom specific questions, queries or concerns about this project should be raised, nor is it known by whom and on what basis questions will addressed, since no lines of management accountability have been set out for public use and scrutiny and since the functions of those comprising the Steering and Management Groups have not been defined, since the organisations they represent have not been declared and since the process through which they were appointed or co-opted onto these groups remains unknown.

I would like to stress that no requests for personal information such as Observatory members’ addresses, telephone numbers or email addresses have been made but it is expected that Action for ME should be prepared to be transparent about who comprises the various Steering and Management Groups tasked with responsibility for the supervision and management of a project in receipt of half a million pounds of public money, in the same way that other organisations are expected to be transparent.

But something rather peculiar has now transpired.

In September 2008, Ciaran Farrell wrote an email to Heather Walker of AfME in which he raised a number of concerns about the operation of the Observatory – including the fact that AfME and the Observatory had still to identify and publish the names of those who comprise the Steering and Management Groups and that this information has also been denied to a number of individuals who have requested it.

On 2 October, as part of her response, Ms Walker says that she will need to forward Mr Farrell’s email to those who are more directly involved [in the Observatory] and she requests his permission to do so.  But she also writes:

“However, I should add that am not aware of any secrecy with regard to membership of the steering group and that web pages about the Observatory are planned and should go up this autumn.”

Incidentally, Ms Walker also adds:

“For future reference, you may wish to know that Trish Taylor has been obliged to stand down as trustee due to ill health and Roy Cheng left the charity about a year ago.”

On 9 October, as part of a response to a further email from Ciaran Farrell, Ms Walker states:

“Composition of the management group and steering group of the Observatory is no secret – see attached…”

and she attaches the following list in a Word document. (I have indicated which individuals are lay members in square brackets, otherwise the list is as provided.)

Steering group

Dr Malu Drachler, UEA
Dr Fiona Poland, UEA
Dr Jose Carlos de Carvalho Leite, UEA
Eliana Lacerda, LSHTM
Dr Luis Nacul, LSHTM
Dr Derek Pheby, Hull
Prof Peter Campion, Foundation Prof of Primary care
Sally Crowe, PRIME/Crowe Associates
Dr Charles Shepherd, MEA
Sara Brooks, AfME
Alison Collins [Lay member]
Cecilia Finnerty [Lay member]
Joanna Doherty [Lay member]
Keith Kahn-Harris [Lay member]
Dr Kirstie Haywood, RCN Institute
Prof Leslie Findley, National ME Centre
Philip Johnson [Lay member]

Management Group

Ben Brown
Peter McAughey
Peter Spencer
George Armstrong
Nick Boatwright
Sara Brooks
Derek Pheby

Reference Group

Simoni Belem
Nicolette Bolgar
Angela Bradley
Ben Brown
Emily Burns
Nine Crummy
Sally Dench
Sarah Feehan
Frances Gibson
Sarah Harper
Catherine Hislop
Barbara Hutchison
Caroline Marr
Caroline Middleton
Sasya Morar
Margaret Norwood
Joanna Shackleton
Susan Sykes
Erzsebet Toth

Others involved in the project

Dr Simon Horton
Prof Amanda Howe
Dr Maggie McArthur
Dr Anne Killet
Dr Lee Hooper
Ian Harvey
Swee Hong Chia
Rachel Mold
Lucy O’Driscoll
Douglas Badenoch

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So there we have it. At last!  Almost a year since I first requested this information from Dr Derek Pheby and from Sir Peter Spencer, CEO of AfME, though it was June 2007 when Ciaran Farrell, then a member of the Observatory Reference Group, first requested this information.

What we still don’t have defined are the individuals’ functions within the Project Group or within the Project as a whole and/or a line management organisational chart, and not all the organisations with whom the individuals above are associated have been given.  Nor has it been clarified through what process seats on the Steering Group were allocated. Nor was it confirmed, last year, whether any other patient organisations had been allocated seats on the Steering Group other than the ME Association – but one presumes not, according to the list furnished by Heather Walker.

Action for ME’s Heather Walker evidently has the authority to release these names; furthermore, she has said that “Composition of the management group and steering group of the Observatory is no secret…”

So what were Dr Derek Pheby, Sarah Brooks and AfME’s CEO, Sir Peter Spencer, playing at in denying individuals like myself and the members of the Observatory Reference Group this information in late 2007?

Why was I forced to put in an FOI to The Big Lottery Fund?

Why has it taken over a year for some of this information to be provided by AfME?

Why had the information I had requested last year not already been placed in the public domain where it could be accessed by any interested party?

Why is the Observatory website not already online?

Why does Action for ME persist in making its members jump through hoops for such basic information?

I shall be commenting further on AfME’s lack of transparency to its membership and the wider public over this and previous issues, like the AfME/MRC joint Research Summit, in the next few days.

Suzy Chapman

29 October 2008

***************************************************

Related links:

The ONE CLICK AfME Dossier by The ONE CLICK Group

The AfME Research Summit and the list they did not want us to see by ME agenda

***************************************************

Posted in AfME, Action for M.E., Freedom of Information, ME Association, ME Observatory | Leave a Comment »

New YouTube channel: action4change4me

Posted by meagenda on October 24, 2008

New YouTube Channel  action4change4me

Ciaran Farrell

24 October 2008

I have finally got around to setting up a YouTube Channel called “action4change 4me” in which I will be examining ME and “CFS” issues as well as ME charity issues and matters concerning the charity and voluntary sector.

I have placed one video on the site, and there will be more to follow – the next one is only a few days away.

My Channel can be found at : http://uk.youtube.com/user/action4change4me

 

Channel: action4change4me

Video 1]: Welcome to my Channel!

Posted in 25% ME Group, APPG on ME, AYME, AfME, Action for M.E., ME Alliance, ME Association, ME Observatory, ME in Parliament, ME in videos, Protests, RiME, The Young ME Sufferers Trust | Leave a Comment »