San Antonio City Council members on Oct. 15 were briefed on proposed changes to the cityonsolidated human-services funding process and on a planned federal-grants "tabletop" exercise meant to help the city and community partners prepare for cuts to federal aid.

Mayor Jones opened the session by saying the two agenda items were linked and warned that federal changes already were being felt locally: "Many of you may have woken up to the same headline I did this morning where Meals on Wheels in our community unfortunately has lost out on that funding," the mayor said.

The briefing from Human Services staff outlined the fiscal year 2026 consolidated funding pool, proposed policy changes for the next RFP cycle, and a timeline for engagement. Melody, the Human Services presenter, told council the adopted FY26 budget sets aside about $24.5 million for the consolidated funding pool, roughly $20 million of which is currently committed to 80 delegate-agency programs; $4.26 million was reserved to be competitively awarded through a new RFP cycle. Staff recommended keeping existing funding priorities (children and youth, strengthening families, senior independence, ending homelessness) and moving to a four-year competitive RFP cycle with the first-year contract running, if approved as proposed, from June 1, 2026, through Sept. 30, 2027.

Melody said staff also proposes raising the minimum award size from $50,000 to $100,000 and maintaining a 20% administrative cap and agency match requirements. She described a three-part effort to improve transparency: clearer designated-vs-competitive categories, simplified performance measures aligned with other funders, and broader nonprofit engagement.

Justina Tate, the city budget director, then outlined the federal grant picture the city faces in FY26: "The total federal grant included in the adopted budget is about $153 million. This represents about 3.8% of our total budget of $4 billion," she said. That $153 million supports personnel and programs across multiple departments; human-services grants in the FY26 adopted budget total roughly $43.6 million, while child- and youth-related federal funding is roughly $50 million when other community providers are included.

Deputy Chief Brian O'Neil, the citymergency-management coordinator, presented the planned tabletop framework. He told council the exercise will proceed in two phases: departmental pre-work (inventory of federal funding ties, mandated services, continuity plans and cross-dependencies) followed by a December tabletop with scenario injects, cross-functional breakouts and recommended follow-ups. He described the tabletop objectives as "information sharing, impact assessment, collaboration, gap identification, public communication and strategic planning."

Council members pressed staff for more district-level and demographic detail and for clarity on how the RFP timing would affect nonprofit partners. Several members said they were uneasy with a four-year guaranteed contract term and urged either shorter terms or built-in council review/extension points. Others warned that raising the minimum award to $100,000 would reduce the number of organizations funded and asked for options to reduce reporting burden on smaller providers.

Council members also asked staff whether the city could delay final guidance to agencies until results of the tabletop are available. Staff said the technical schedule currently calls for issuing the RFP Dec. 1, with applications due Jan. 26 and council consideration of awards May 8, 2026; contracts would start June 1, 2026. Staff said it could present the council with options (including extending current eight-month contract extensions to 12 months) if the council wanted to wait for tabletop results before finalizing RFP guidance.

Mayor Jones and other council members flagged the broader context that prompted the exercise: simultaneous federal reductions to safety-net programs such as CHIP, SNAP, Medicaid and other federal grants could increase local demand while reducing partner capacity. Staff asked council members for targeted input by Oct. 20 on the scenarios they want the exercise to include (for example, an illustrative loss of 50% of federal grant funding to health and human-services accounts) so the exercise can produce district-level impact estimates.

No formal motions or votes were recorded on the consolidated funding recommendations or on RFP timing during the session. Staff and council agreed to follow up: staff will return with a memo laying out the RFP schedule options, the tabletop framework and the district- and demographic-level data requested by council members.

The discussion underscored several tradeoffs the council will face in coming months: preserving continuity of essential services for vulnerable residents versus adjusting funding categories, contract terms and reporting requirements to reduce administrative burden and to make scarce local dollars go further if federal support falls.

The session ended with staff commitments on timelines and follow-up material and with council members urging close coordination with nonprofit funders, county partners and health-care institutions in the tabletop and RFP processes.