Granite State Independent Living

What the center reported

211Consumers served129 carried over, 82 new
11Information and referral contacts
$5,006,944Total income
$23,180Part B
$188,617Part C
498Goals achievedof 911 set
11Moved out of institutionsrelocation goals achieved
8Years reportedof 8 since 2016

Funding sources

Income by source, report year 2023Dollars received, as reported. The report does not show expenditure.
Source	Amount
Title VII Part B (through the state)	$23,180
Title VII Part C (direct federal)	$188,617
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$650,903
State government funds	$378,792
Local government funds	$0
Private and other	$3,765,452
Total income	$5,006,944

Eight years of reports

Granite State Independent Living by report yearA blank row means no report was found for that year.
Report year	Consumers served	Total income	Part B	Part C	Moved out of institutions
2016	84	$2,232,624	$55,325	$144,652	1
2017	146	$3,472,895	$37,410	$144,652	1
2018	163	$3,199,779	$31,523	$163,125	1
2019	192	$3,191,925	$24,894	$167,743	1
2020	210	$3,160,477	$30,143	$167,743	1
2021	202	$3,364,504	$25,044	$167,743	0
2022	190	$4,034,267	$24,678	$167,743	0
2023	211	$5,006,944	$23,180	$188,617	11

Consumers served, by year

201684
2017146
2018163
2019192
2020210
2021202
2022190
2023211

Measures against peers

Percentiles place this center among the 349 centers reporting in 2023 (national) and among centers of similar size (size peers: quartile 4 of 4 by total income). 100 is the most favourable position. How each measure is built and what it cannot tell you.

Relative measures, report year 2023
Measure	Value	National percentile	Size-peer percentile	What it is
Income per consumer	$23,730	3th	10th	Total income divided by consumers served. Lower ranks higher. It is intensity, not efficiency: a center doing nursing-home transitions costs more per person than one doing mostly information.
Income per goal achieved	$10,054	32th	56th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	54.7%	55th	52th	Goals achieved as a share of goals set. A rate near 100% can mean goals are recorded only when already met.
Records closed with all goals met	1.0%	5th	4th	Share of closed consumer records closed as "completed all goals set". Recorded at exit, so a stronger signal than goal counts.
Transitions per 100 consumers	5.21	83th	85th	Relocation-from-institution goals achieved per 100 consumers. Zero is common at small centers; the percentile shows how common.
Transitions per $100,000 of Part C	5.83	74th	65th	The same count against direct federal funding.
Service fill rate	100.0%	76th	78th	Consumers receiving a service as a share of consumers requesting it, across all service types except information and referral.
Board members with significant disabilities	67.0%	37th	44th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 8 of 12 members.
Staff with disabilities	68.0%	33th	56th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 59.0 of 87.0 FTE.
Equity index	5.5	97th	95th	Index of dissimilarity between the race and ethnicity of consumers and of the state's disability population, 0 to 100. Lower ranks higher. Compared with the state, not the center's actual service area.
Income volatility	21.6%	45th	49th	Coefficient of variation of total income across the years reported. Lower ranks higher.
Data-quality flags	0	54th	54th	Failed arithmetic checks in this year's report. Fewer ranks higher. Listed below.

Title VII funds (Parts B and C and Chapter 2) were 4.2% of income; Part B varied by 31.8% (coefficient of variation) across the years reported.

Services requested and received

Consumers requesting and receiving each service, report year 2023Information and referral is counted as contacts (11) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
IL skills training	271	271	100.0%
Personal assistance	85	85	100.0%
Communication services	43	43	100.0%
Youth transition	33	33	100.0%
Peer counseling	9	9	100.0%
Transportation	5	5	100.0%
Housing and home modifications	4	4	100.0%
Advocacy and legal services	2	2	100.0%
Assistive technology	1	1	100.0%
Recreational services	1	1	100.0%
All services	454	454	100.0%

Largest unmet demand

Services with ten or more requests, ordered by the share that went unfilled.

Communication services: 43 of 43 requests filled (100.0%).
IL skills training: 271 of 271 requests filled (100.0%).
Personal assistance: 85 of 85 requests filled (100.0%).
Youth transition: 33 of 33 requests filled (100.0%).

Goals by category

Goals set, achieved and in progress, report year 2023
Goal category	Set	Achieved	In progress
Self-advocacy and self-empowerment	165	97	59
Communication	47	30	11
Mobility and transportation	7	1	2
Community-based living	240	118	95
Educational	87	51	22
Vocational	57	30	12
Self-care	126	74	52
Information access and technology	103	51	35
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	17	11	4
Community and social participation	56	34	17
Other	6	1	0

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	4
5 to 19	73
20 to 24	10
25 to 59	51
60 and older	73
Age unavailable	0

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	46
Mental or emotional	28
Physical	121
Hearing	7
Vision	7
Multiple disabilities	0
Other	2

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with New Hampshire residents with a disabilityCenter shares exclude 1 consumers of unknown race. State shares are from ACS B18101A to B18101I. A ratio above 1 means the group is a larger share of consumers than of the state's disability population.
Group	Consumers	Share of consumers	Share of state disability population	Ratio
White	186	88.6%	89.5%	0.99
Black or African American	2	1.0%	1.2%	0.80
American Indian or Alaska Native	9	4.3%	0.2%	19.28
Asian	4	1.9%	1.3%	1.42
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	2	1.0%	0.1%	16.45
Two or more races	0	0.0%	4.3%	0.00
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	7	3.3%	3.4%	0.99

Hispanic or Latino is an ethnicity reported alongside race in the PPR, so shares can sum to more than 100%. The comparison is with the whole state, which overstates any mismatch for a center that serves one part of it.

Data quality

Eight arithmetic checks run over every center's report. They test whether the tables agree with each other, nothing more. How often each check fails nationally.

None of the arithmetic checks failed for this report. That means the tables add up, not that the counts are verified.

What this cannot tell you

The report is unaudited self-report. Nobody verifies the consumer counts.
It reports income, not expenditure. A cost measure here is a stand-in until checked against the center's audited financial statements.
Part B and Part C outcomes are not separable. The center reports total activity.
There is no county, city or island detail in the public file.
Percentiles compare centers whose definitions of "consumer" and "goal" may differ. The data-quality row is the only signal of that in the public data.
Relative position is not impact. Nothing here supports a causal claim about what the center changed in anyone's life.

Source: Administration for Community Living, Centers for Independent Living Program Performance Report public datafiles, report years 2016 to 2023. Generated 2026-10-25.