Who Should Community Project Funding Serve—People or Corporate Influence?
Understanding how federal funding reaches Indianapolis and the choices behind where it goes.
Every member of Congress can bring federal dollars home to their district.
The program is called Community Project Funding, and in theory, it allows communities to compete for investments in infrastructure, public safety, workforce development, and local economic growth.
But in practice, not every community can compete on equal terms.
Some urgent needs—like mental health crisis centers—are being locked out of funding, even as these services become more critical each day. Nonprofits worry about political scrutiny simply for supporting marginalized communities, putting vital resources at risk.
Meanwhile, industries that already receive billions in federal contracts often remain close to the center of the federal spending pipeline.
Which raises an important question for Indianapolis:
When Congress brings federal money home, who is it really serving?
What Community Project Funding Is
Community Project Funding (CPF) is the modern version of what was once known as congressional earmarks.
Congress banned earmarks in 2011 after criticism about waste and political favoritism. But after a decade of complaints that Congress had lost its ability to direct investments to specific local needs, lawmakers restored the practice in 2021 under a new system with stronger transparency rules.
Under the current rules:
Members of the House can submit up to 15 Community Project Funding requests each year.
Projects must go to government entities or nonprofit organizations.
Members must certify that they have no financial interest in the projects.
Requests and supporting documents must be publicly disclosed.
Across the country, this program now directs billions of dollars each year to local projects.
Individual projects typically range from hundreds of thousands of dollars to several million, depending on the type of program involved.
When used well, Community Project Funding allows members of Congress to bring meaningful investments back to their communities.
But the program’s structure also determines who can compete for those funds—and who cannot.
What Community Project Funding Can—and Cannot—Fund
One of the lesser-known aspects of Community Project Funding is that requests must fit within existing federal funding accounts inside the appropriations process.
That means the kinds of projects that can be funded are limited by how federal programs themselves are structured.
Projects commonly funded through CPF include:
transportation and infrastructure improvements
public safety equipment and facilities
water systems and environmental projects
workforce training programs
university research initiatives
But some of the most critical and pressing challenges communities face are shut out from this funding, leaving urgent needs unmet.
Mental health infrastructure
Because behavioral health programs are funded primarily through competitive grant systems rather than earmark-eligible accounts, mental health crisis centers and behavioral health facilities generally cannot receive Community Project Funding.
While cities across the country scramble to build crisis centers and expand behavioral health systems, Congress is offering almost no direct path to funding these urgent projects.
LGBTQ organizations
Another barrier is political.
Several LGBTQ organizations have told me they feel effectively disqualified from even asking for federal funding after recent executive orders targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.
Those orders do not explicitly prohibit LGBTQ nonprofits from receiving federal funds. But they have created a chilling effect—leaving many organizations unsure whether their work will be scrutinized or rejected simply for serving marginalized communities.
When the window for funding is already narrow, these barriers become urgent obstacles—blocking those with the most at stake.
Because they shape who feels able to compete for federal investment in the first place.
What Indianapolis Received in Community Project Funding
For context, across the country, the typical request ranges from hundreds of thousands of dollars to several million, and many members secure between roughly $10 million and $30 million annually for projects in their districts. In some cases, members of Congress have secured more than $50 million in a single cycle when large infrastructure or defense-related projects are involved.
In the most recent appropriations cycle, Rep. André Carson announced that he secured $13.08 million in Community Project Funding for Indianapolis.
Indianapolis Community Project Funding—FY2025
The largest single award—$2 million—went to the Indianapolis Airport Authority for explosive detection technology used in baggage screening.
Rep. Carson originally requested $15.5 million.
Following the Money
The $2 million airport project will fund the installation of an Explosive Detection System (EDS) to improve baggage screening and enhance airport safety.
Explosive detection systems used in U.S. airports are manufactured by major defense and security contractors—including companies like Leidos and its Reveal Baggage Inspection System, which produces explosive detection technology used in aviation security.
Leidos is also a political donor to Rep. Carson.
Federal Election Commission records indicate that during the 2023–2024 election cycle, the Leidos Inc. Political Action Committee contributed $10,000 to Rep. Carson—a connection that is notable given the airport funding will likely be used to purchase equipment from companies like Leidos.
Community Project Funding is technically allocated to public entities, such as airport authorities, rather than directly to private corporations. But when those funds are used to purchase specialized technology, they often flow downstream through procurement contracts to the companies that manufacture it.
That dynamic raises an important question.
If Congress has limited opportunities to direct federal investment into our communities, should those dollars reinforce the same corporate pipelines that already dominate federal spending?
Or should they prioritize the needs of the people and neighborhoods who struggle to compete for federal investment at all?
What Should Be Prioritized
Community Project Funding gives members of Congress a limited number of opportunities each year to direct federal investment into their districts.
Because those opportunities are limited — and because some urgent needs cannot compete for these funds at all — the question is not simply whether federal dollars come to Indianapolis.
The question is how those dollars are prioritized.
If we have only a handful of chances to bring federal investment into our communities, those projects should focus on the needs that are hardest for neighborhoods to solve on their own.
Communities like Indianapolis could benefit from federal investments that strengthen:
housing stability and homelessness prevention
infrastructure improvements in underserved neighborhoods
workforce pathways into good-paying jobs
environmental resilience and flood mitigation
community-based public safety programs
And Congress should modernize the program so communities can request funding for the kinds of projects currently excluded — including behavioral health infrastructure and crisis response systems.
A Tool That Should Serve Communities
Community Project Funding is not inherently good or bad.
It is simply a tool.
Used well, it can strengthen neighborhoods and help communities invest in the infrastructure and services people rely on every day.
Used poorly, it risks becoming another channel through which federal spending reinforces the same influence pipelines that already dominate Washington.
Indianapolis deserves leadership in Congress that not only understands how federal appropriations work but also uses those tools to prioritize people over corporate influence, ensuring our community’s needs come before special interests.