Evanston — The Social Services Committee on Dec. 4 adopted a three‑part allocation method to produce initial funding recommendations for 2026 social‑service grants, prioritizing housing and shelter programs while trimming requests across the board.

Staff told the committee that the city’s social‑service budget is flat and that returning applicants and several new applicants have requested increases; staff said new applicants alone requested about $200,000 more than available funds. The committee debated three staff scenarios for turning applications and SSC scores into initial award recommendations and settled on a hybrid (Option 3) that staff described as a ‘‘methodical’’ way to start allocations.

Under the adopted approach, staff will remove a small number of lowest‑scoring applicants (in the scenario presented, staff used an 80% cutoff that would have zeroed out four applicants), prioritize housing and shelter proposals to align with city council goals, and reduce remaining requests in proportion to SSC scores plus a small additional percentage to create reallocation funds. Staff estimated the example scenario would free about $45,000 to reallocate to higher‑priority programs.

"This allocation discussion that we're having tonight and, at our next meeting, these are gonna be hard conversations," a staff presenter said as the committee began the review. After members asked for more detail, staff agreed to include, in the next packet, prior‑year awards, applicants' score averages, amounts requested, the proposed initial allocation, and the share or count of Evanston residents served — data members said they wanted to see to compare increases against prior funding.

A committee member moved to adopt Option 3; another seconded. The committee adopted the method on a roll‑call vote and members recorded their votes as 'Yes.' The committee directed staff to bring a recalculated applicant list and proposed dollar allocations to the next meeting for detailed discussion and possible adjustment prior to presenting recommendations to City Council.

Votes at a glance: The committee approved (1) acceptance of minutes from Oct. 9 by voice vote, (2) adoption of Option 3 as the allocation methodology by roll‑call vote, and (3) calendar amendments to add Jan. 22 and June 11 to the 2026 schedule by roll‑call vote. The minutes approval was taken by voice vote (the transcript records a unanimous voice vote but does not list individual tallies); the Option 3 and calendar motions were recorded by roll call and appear in the meeting record as affirmative.

Staff report and next steps: Staff said the draft 2026 action plan is open to public comment through Dec. 15 and outlined projections for federal grants: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) projections were presented as flat in staff scenarios, Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) funding was uncertain and not assumed in the draft plan, and HOME funding had several possible outcomes in staff scenarios (staff cited an illustrative $275,000 projection in one scenario). Staff said final grant awards could prompt a substantial amendment that would reopen public comment.

No members of the public spoke during either public‑comment period. The committee adjourned after its business and directed staff to return with the recalculated allocations and requested comparative data at the next meeting.

(Reporting in this article is based exclusively on committee remarks recorded in the Dec. 4 Social Services Committee transcript.)