Summary report of discussions at the forum “Nepali Diaspora Organizations in North America: Achievements, Opportunities, and Challenges”, Coppell, Texas, USA July 2022
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The forum “Nepali Diaspora Organizations in North America: Achievements, Opportunities and Challenges” was held at the annual convention of the Association of Nepalis in the Americas (ANA) in Coppell, TX, USA on July 2, 2022. Nepalese Society of Texas (NST) hosted the convention and forum. As studies related to diaspora have become important topics in the fields of development, community culture, sociology and anthropology, ANA decided to include this topic in the forums organized at the national convention. The global Nepali diaspora population in 2022 is estimated at 800,000. Although no authoritative statistics is available, the Nepali diaspora in North America in 2022 is estimated to be at least 250,000 strong. To support the community in its social, cultural, professional, and philanthropic pursuits and aspirations, several hundred socio-cultural and professional associations and organizations in the continent have been established by the Nepali diaspora members. As the diaspora number grows, and old associations begin to mature, and new organizations keep forming, they all face several growth and management related opportunities and challenges. Organizations are defined as formal entities with human members that are established to achieve common goals of its members, and the related larger community. Organizations have well-defined objectives, structure, by-laws, protocols, and procedures on how the bodies will be run and governed. The Nepali diaspora organizations in the North American continent - mostly established as non-profits, charities, or informal groups - have generally served the community well, and have achieved much success to reach their goals. In the forum, we mainly covered the non-profit and voluntary organizations built by the Nepali communities in the US and Canada. Organizations evolve from the visions and teamwork of its leaders and members. The classic Tuckman’s model of project management identifies five phases of teamwork development as: 1. Forming, 2. Storming, 3. Norming, 4. Performing, and 5. Adjourning. The Nepali diaspora organizations in North America are in the different phases of these performance stages in terms of their organizational teamwork. Some have just begun, and some have already matured. The purpose of the forum was as follows. Review the sociology of diaspora organizations to advance the community’s social, cultural professional, and philanthropic needs and aspirations. Assess the role of diaspora in national development. Asses the level of successes of the organizations to achieve the goals. Review the challenges being faced by the including personal goals of the leaders, management and bureaucratic needs and hurdles, and groups that may evolve and hinder the organizational objectives. Discuss case studies, examples and best practices as seen in other non-profits seen in North America. Propose, recommend, and outline way forward in improving the functioning of the organizations. The forum summary is expected to be of interest to the diaspora members, students, academics and professionals interested in the work of the Nepali diaspora including their activities in the adopted countries and development in Nepal.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".