Our Commitment to Anti-Racism: Beyond Diversity, Equity and Inclusion: An introduction to CFC's commitment to supporting and progressing anti-racism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As an organization, CFC's purpose is "Relentlessly pursuing a future where everyone belongs." Without anti-racism, and confronting the inherent inequalities and discrimination in our society, it is not possible to create the true space of belonging that is needed and necessary for a just and equitable future.CFC has been a historically white-led organization. While this remains the case, ongoing programming has worked to engage and include input from Black, Indigenous and people of colour, on intersectionality and intersectional feminism, Indigenous resilience, and equity principles in emergency grantmaking. These have been starting points that have helped us further reflect on systemic racism in Canada, however we know we need to do more, and we need to help local community foundations do the same. During recent years, the organization has been privileged to grow and be able to support additional staff members, including Black, Indigenous and people of colour staff and board members who were welcomed to the team full-time, but the organization acknowledges that up until recent years, there has been limited Black, Indigenous or people of colour representation on our staff, board and in our program design.Given that we are still at the start of an anti-racism journey, we did not feel it was appropriate to share or market this package as a guidebook. Until we do more of our own inner work to address inherent systems of racism and white supremacy in our systems, we are not in a position to designate ourselves as leaders in this space.This invitation is not meant to be an exclusive guide, toolkit, or one-stop-shop for anti-racism materials for community foundations. Rather, this is a space to begin a conversation on the community foundation movement's shortcomings, and to take pause to reflect on where we need to go.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.053 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".