This budget season CFN is continuing to pilot a new approach to weaving together public documents, meeting transcripts, and community commentary into AI-powered rapid-fire briefs that neighbors can actually use. The working name for this effort is CivicPulse—an emerging platform that will sift the noise, surface the facts, and spotlight the stakes for each council district. We covered the Mayor’s budget address and why it matters as a first step. Today we are covering the Metro Council External Agency Funding budget hearing meeting which was held on Tuesday, May 20. As always, generative AI is experimental but below are the findings.

Louisville Metro’s External Agency Funding (EAF) program still totals $2.25 million in the FY 2025-26 budget, but that familiar headline masks a dramatic shift in how—and to whom—those dollars will flow.

Fewer Checks, Bigger Amounts

Last year 96 nonprofits received awards, some as low as $5,000. This year only 43 organizations made the cut, each promised at least $25,000. Council-directed reforms replaced dozens of micro-grants with larger, outcome-driven awards—an intentional move to fund complete programs rather than patch gaps.

Why City Hall Changed Course

During the hearing, Metro staff pointed to two hurdles:

• Administrative drag: A $5K grant triggers the same paperwork and auditing as a $100K grant.
• Limited impact: Tiny awards rarely cover an entire program, forcing nonprofits to scramble for matching funds.

To sharpen impact, the review panel required every applicant to ask for $25K or more, scored proposals on measurable outcomes, and let reviewers recommend exact award sizes.

The Flashpoints

Councilmembers applauded the quest for impact but raised urgent questions:

• Equity: More than 50 former grantees—many grassroots or BIPOC-led—lost all funding.
• Transparency: Several applicants scored above 90 percent yet received nothing because the pool ran dry.
• Consistency: Some proposals were reviewed by only two panelists, creating uneven scoring.
• Communication: Rejected groups reported little feedback on why they missed the mark.

Requests are now on the table for a full list of unfunded but high-scoring applicants, clearer scoring rubrics, and possible tweaks to the “one-size-fits-all” $25K minimum.

Where the Money Is Going

• Social Services Panel: Concentrated on homelessness and housing stability.
• Violence Prevention Panel: Only 12 of 41 applicants funded—competition was fierce.
• Arts & Creative Industries: Slight contraction—20 groups funded versus 22 last year.

In one eye-opening example, Volunteers of America asked for $1 million and received $116K—enough to raise eyebrows about feasibility.

What Comes Next?

Councilmembers floated three ideas:

1. Re-introduce micro-grants through a separate stream for emerging, grassroots groups.
2. Create a small Council-controlled EAF reserve to fill critical gaps mid-year.
3. Publish real-time performance dashboards so residents can track outcomes.

Why It Matters to Every Neighborhood

EAF dollars underwrite street-level work: outreach to unhoused neighbors, after-school violence-prevention, food pantries, arts programs, and community centers. When funding vanishes, services in Louisville’s lowest-income blocks are the first to shrink.

Bigger checks to fewer agencies could yield deeper impact—if the city also keeps equity, transparency, and neighborhood voice at the forefront. As these reforms roll forward, residents and nonprofits alike must stay engaged, ask tough questions, and push for a funding model that marries efficiency with inclusion.

Have thoughts or stories about how these changes affect your neighborhood? Share them in the comments or email us at info@centerforneighborhoods.org. Your voice drives better policy.