Introduction: The fundamental distinction between Cochrane Reviews and other reports of systematic reviews is that there is a commitment to update and amend them in the light of relevant additional data and criticisms. This undertaking implies the need to secure continuing support (i) for the editorial and other infrastructure required to support and monitor this process, and (ii) for some of the people responsible for maintaining individual reviews, particularly when the flow of new evidence is rapid. I will present existing examples, from various countries, of these two kinds of support, and I will propose that a Cochrane Funders' Forum be established to agree with the Collaboration the conditions upon which such funding should be provided.