Center for Open Science, Inc.
Programs and results
What we aim to solve
The Center for Open Science (COS) exists to increase openness, integrity, and reproducibility of research. The academic research enterprise is beset by culture, systems, markets, and institutional structures that create a gap between scholarly values and the policies, incentives, and norms that shape behavior. This creates friction in the pace of discovery to advance knowledge, solutions, and cures. COS is a culture change organization that aims to align scholarly values with scholarly practices. It does so by developing and advancing a systems-level strategy for changing culture and behavior toward greater rigor, transparency, and sharing of research process, outputs, and outcomes.
Our programs
What are the organization's current programs, how do they measure success, and who do the programs serve?
Open Science Framework (OSF)
The Open Science Framework (OSF) provides free and open source project management support for researchers across the entire research lifecycle. As a collaboration tool, the OSF helps researchers work on projects privately with a limited number of collaborators and make parts of their projects public, or make all the project publicly accessible for broader dissemination. As a workflow system, the OSF enables connections to the many services researchers already use to streamline their process and increase efficiency. As a flexible repository, it can store and archive research data, protocols, and materials.
SHARE: SHared Access Research Ecosystem
SHARE is building a free, open, data set about research and scholarly activities across their life cycle.
Systematizing Confidence in Open Research and Evidence (SCORE)
Assessing the credibility of research claims is a central and continuous part of the scientific process. However, current assessment strategies often require substantial time and effort. To accelerate research progress, the Center for Open Science (COS) partnered with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's (DARPA) program Systematizing Confidence in Open Research and Evidence (SCORE) in 2019 on work towards developing and deploying automated tools that provide rapid, scalable, and accurate confidence scores for research claims.
Since then, COS has completed extraction of scientific claims from a stratified sample of social-behavioral science papers. In total 7,066 claims were extracted manually, enabling confidence scores to be assigned by human forecasters and algorithms. Concurrently, COS worked with hundreds of researchers to conduct replications and reproductions on a subset of these extracted claims.
Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines
Transparency, open sharing, and reproducibility are core values of science, but not always part of daily practice. Journals, funders, and scholarly societies can increase reproducibility of research by adopting the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines and helping them evolve to meet the needs of researchers and publishers while pursuing the most transparent practices.
TOP Factor
Journal policies can be evaluated based on the degree to which they comply with the TOP Guidelines. This TOP Factor is a metric that reports the steps that a journal is taking to implement open science practices, practices that are based on the core principles of the scientific community. It is an alternative way to assess journal qualities, and is an improvement over traditional metrics that measure mean citation rates. The TOP Factor is transparent (see underlying data and the evaluation rubric) and will be responsive to community feedback.
Where we work
Awards
The Einstein Foundation Award 2021
Einstein Foundation
External reviews

Our results
How does this organization measure their results? It's a hard question but an important one.
Number of OSF registered users
This metric is no longer tracked.Totals By Year
Related Program
Open Science Framework (OSF)
Type of Metric
Output - describing our activities and reach
Direction of Success
Increasing
Goals & Strategy
Reports and documents
Download strategic planLearn about the organization's key goals, strategies, capabilities, and progress.
Charting impact
Four powerful questions that require reflection about what really matters - results.
What is the organization aiming to accomplish?
We envision a future scholarly community in which:
The process, content, and outcomes of research are openly accessible by default;
All scholarly content is preserved and discoverable, and openness, interoperability, and transparency are normative for scholarly services;
All stakeholders are included and respected in the research lifecycle; and
All stakeholders share pursuit of truth as the primary incentive and motivation for scholarship.
Achieving the mission requires culture change in the incentives that drive researchers’ behavior, the infrastructure that supports research, and the business models that dominate scholarly communication.
What are the organization's key strategies for making this happen?
To scale sustainable adoption of open behaviors by researchers, COS:
1. provides open infrastructure that makes it possible to do the behaviors,
2. conducts user-centered product development to make it easy to do the behaviors,
3. supports grassroots organizing to activate and train adopters and make their behavior
visible to shift community norms toward the behaviors,
4. offers solutions to journals, funders, and institutions to nudge incentives to make it
desirable to do the behaviors, and
5. provides and promotes a policy framework for stakeholders to make the behaviors
required.
What are the organization's capabilities for doing this?
What started as a small project in Charlottesville, Virginia in the United States, has evolved to be a more distributed
workforce with more than 50 employees. COS is committed to openness and treating scholarly research and the infrastructure supporting it as public goods. All COS produced data, materials, code, and reports are openly licensed and publicly accessible to the maximum extent possible. COS made its progress with a dedicated, diverse, and skilled core staff, and, critically, thousands of individual researchers and stakeholders who provided time, energy, and action as a service because of their shared vision for improving the research culture. COS’s contributions outstrip its staff size and resources because of the collaborative partnerships with so many groups across the research landscape.
What have they accomplished so far and what's next?
COS accomplishments are noted in the Impact Summary, and future goals are noted in the Goals section.
How we listen
Seeking feedback from people served makes programs more responsive and effective. Here’s how this organization is listening.
-
How is your organization using feedback from the people you serve?
To identify and remedy poor client service experiences, To identify bright spots and enhance positive service experiences, To make fundamental changes to our programs and/or operations, To inform the development of new programs/projects, To identify where we are less inclusive or equitable across demographic groups, To strengthen relationships with the people we serve, To understand people's needs and how we can help them achieve their goals
-
Which of the following feedback practices does your organization routinely carry out?
We collect feedback from the people we serve at least annually, We take steps to get feedback from marginalized or under-represented people, We aim to collect feedback from as many people we serve as possible, We take steps to ensure people feel comfortable being honest with us, We look for patterns in feedback based on people’s interactions with us (e.g., site, frequency of service, etc.), We engage the people who provide feedback in looking for ways we can improve in response, We act on the feedback we receive, We tell the people who gave us feedback how we acted on their feedback, We ask the people who gave us feedback how well they think we responded
-
What challenges does the organization face when collecting feedback?
We don't have any major challenges to collecting feedback
Financials
Unlock nonprofit financial insights that will help you make more informed decisions. Try our monthly plan today.
- Analyze a variety of pre-calculated financial metrics
- Access beautifully interactive analysis and comparison tools
- Compare nonprofit financials to similar organizations
Want to see how you can enhance your nonprofit research and unlock more insights?
Learn more
about GuideStar Pro.
Operations
The people, governance practices, and partners that make the organization tick.
Connect with nonprofit leaders
SubscribeBuild relationships with key people who manage and lead nonprofit organizations with GuideStar Pro. Try a low commitment monthly plan today.
- Analyze a variety of pre-calculated financial metrics
- Access beautifully interactive analysis and comparison tools
- Compare nonprofit financials to similar organizations
Want to see how you can enhance your nonprofit research and unlock more insights? Learn More about GuideStar Pro.
Connect with nonprofit leaders
SubscribeBuild relationships with key people who manage and lead nonprofit organizations with GuideStar Pro. Try a low commitment monthly plan today.
- Analyze a variety of pre-calculated financial metrics
- Access beautifully interactive analysis and comparison tools
- Compare nonprofit financials to similar organizations
Want to see how you can enhance your nonprofit research and unlock more insights? Learn More about GuideStar Pro.
Center for Open Science, Inc.
Board of directorsas of 10/26/2023
Alison Mudditt
CEO, Public Library of Science (PLOS)
Alison Mudditt
Public Library of Science, CEO; COS Board Vice Chair
Jon Hill
Investure, LLC, Managing Director; COS Board Treasurer
Dr. Marcia McNutt
National Academy of Sciences, President
Dr. Rebecca Saxe
BCS at MIT, Professor of Cognitive Science
Dr. Brian Nosek
Center for Open Science, Executive Director and Co-Founder (Ex-Officio)
Dr. Arturo Casadevall
Chair, Molecular Microbiology & Immunology; Alfred & Jill Sommer Professor and Chair; Bloomberg Distinguished Professor; Johns Hopkins University
Dr. George Banks
Associate Professor of Management, University of North Carolina Charlotte
Dr. Lara Mangravite
Sage Bionetworks, President
Dr. Elaine Chen
Cummings Professor of the Practice of Entrepreneurship, Tufts University; Director of Tufts Entrepreneurship Center, Tufts Gordon Institute; Founder and Managing Director, ConceptSpring
Ms. Elaine Westbrooks
Vice Provost for University Libraries and University Librarian, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Dr. Maryrose Franko
Executive Director of the Health Research Alliance (HRA)
Dr. Susanna-Assunta Sansone
Professor of Data Readiness; Associate Director, Oxford e-Research Centre; and Academic Lead for Research Practice, University of Oxford
Board leadership practices
GuideStar worked with BoardSource, the national leader in nonprofit board leadership and governance, to create this section.
-
Board orientation and education
Does the board conduct a formal orientation for new board members and require all board members to sign a written agreement regarding their roles, responsibilities, and expectations? Yes -
CEO oversight
Has the board conducted a formal, written assessment of the chief executive within the past year ? Yes -
Ethics and transparency
Have the board and senior staff reviewed the conflict-of-interest policy and completed and signed disclosure statements in the past year? Yes -
Board composition
Does the board ensure an inclusive board member recruitment process that results in diversity of thought and leadership? Yes -
Board performance
Has the board conducted a formal, written self-assessment of its performance within the past three years? Yes
Organizational demographics
Who works and leads organizations that serve our diverse communities? Candid partnered with CHANGE Philanthropy on this demographic section.
Leadership
The organization's leader identifies as:
Race & ethnicity
Gender identity
Sexual orientation
Disability
Equity strategies
Last updated: 10/20/2023GuideStar partnered with Equity in the Center - an organization that works to shift mindsets, practices, and systems to increase racial equity - to create this section. Learn more
- We use a vetting process to identify vendors and partners that share our commitment to race equity.
- We help senior leadership understand how to be inclusive leaders with learning approaches that emphasize reflection, iteration, and adaptability.
- We measure and then disaggregate job satisfaction and retention data by race, function, level, and/or team.