Philanthropy on the First Coast: A Comprehensive Look at Giving and Philanthropy in Metorpolitan Jacksonville
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Gateway City. The River City. The Bold New City of the South. Florida's First Coast. Ours is an emerging community and these changing monikers reveal much about its evolution. In the last quarter of the 20th century, Jacksonville, Duval County, and the counties that surround it began to move away from sleepy Southern traditions as they experienced unprecedented population growth. The influx of newcomers stimulated a new appreciation of the area's natural beauty and resources. And a new global economy triggered exploration of new economic opportunities. Community leaders began to think regionally, recognizing common interests and challenges best met by common effort.Philanthropy on the First Coast, likewise, is emerging. With population growth has come new wealth, and organized philanthropy in the region has grown exponentially. Of the 320 foundations located on the First Coast, almost half have been created since 1996.Philanthropy on the First Coast, however, is far from mature:Wealth, while present, is not widespread.Individual giving is below both national and state norms.Those individuals who give on the First Coast give generously, but the number of individuals who give is far lower than in other communities.Organized philanthropy, while growing, attracts less capital than in other communities.While new foundation formation is strong, the local foundation community remains dominated by three large, national foundations that are headquartered in Jacksonville. Without them, foundation assets per capita in the region would plummet almost 40 percent, from $1,082 to $656.But philanthropy is gaining traction:There is significant wealth along the water – both ocean and riverfront – and those wealthy individuals demonstrate a strong culture of giving.The area's new foundations, as yet, are thinly capitalized (as are most new foundations). But they carry the potential to be substantial philanthropic assets. Over the next 25 years:, with no additional contributions to capital, the assets of these 146 new foundations could more than double while, at the same time, they could generate almost $300 million in charitable contributions.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".