MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902455350 · doi:10.3138/cjpe.31157

Three Steps Toward Sustainability: Spreadsheets as a Data-Analysis System for Non-Profit Organizations

2018· article· en· W2902455350 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Program Evaluation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpreadsheets and End-User Computing
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)SustainabilityProfit (economics)BusinessData collectionWork (physics)Computer scienceCompetitive advantageKnowledge managementProcess managementMarketingEconomicsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Many non-profits face barriers developing systems to collect and analyze data that can leverage the type of information that their funders and stakeholders require. Constraints such as limited evaluation expertise, time, and money make this virtually impossible to achieve without a viable solution. In an increasingly competitive environment, it is imperative that non-profits find innovative ways to track and measure their work within their evaluative capabilities. There are different ways in which evaluators can help even the most constrained non-profit organizations capture their reach and make the most of their existing data. This article proposes a three-step framework for the development of a data-collection and -analysis system through the use of spreadsheets. Not only is this proposed system feasible within the constraints of the non-profit sector, but it is also valuable for the sustainability of their services over time.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.117
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it