MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7010466388

Indigenous Peoples Resilience Fund: Building Infrastructure for Indigenous Philanthropy

2020· report· en· W7010466388 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIssue Lab (Candid) · 2020
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousResilience (materials science)Psychological resilienceFirst nationCommunity resilienceKey (lock)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report presents a brief overview of the Indigenous Peoples Resilience Fund (IPRF): a multi-funder, Indigenous-led initiative established to support Indigenous communities across Canada as they respond to the current health crisis. In doing so, IPRF also contributes to the construction of an Indigenous philanthropic infrastructure in Canada.The report is based on several conversations with key stakeholders in the process of establishing the IPRF. Two in-depth semi-structured interviews with individuals that started the initiative: Bruce Lawson, CEO of the Counselling Foundation of Canada; Victoria McKenzie Grant, Teme-Augama Anishnabai Kway (Woman of the Deep Water People) and Wanda Brascoupé, Kanien'keha, Skarù r?', Anishinabe, as representatives of the Indigenous Peoples Resilience Fund. Along with these conversations, the analysis also draws on conversations with Andrew Chunilall, CEO of Community Foundations Canada (the host partner of IPRF), and Jennifer Brennan, Head of Canada Programs at the Mastercard Foundation, which participated in initial funder consultations that preceded the establishment of the fund. Information on IPRF objectives, priorities, and future steps come from a draft version of the IPRF founding document, which was made available by the three key informants. The interviews were conducted in the first half of May 2020.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIssue Lab (Candid)French-language works237,207