Vermont Center for Independent Living

What the center reported

433Consumers served173 carried over, 260 new
1,374Information and referral contacts
$2,739,023Total income
$109,157Part B
$762,927Part C
229Goals achievedof 476 set
0Moved 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)	$109,157
Title VII Part C (direct federal)	$762,927
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$696,222
State government funds	$1,056,916
Local government funds	$36,553
Private and other	$77,248
Total income	$2,739,023

Eight years of reports

Vermont Center for 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	582	$1,785,610	$104,511	$585,094	4
2017	529	$1,864,595	$104,511	$585,094	3
2018	530	$2,138,250	$111,478	$659,814	0
2019	527	$1,841,439	$105,000	$678,494	2
2020	745	$1,820,388	$74,726	$678,494	0
2021	488	$2,007,424	$135,274	$678,494	0
2022	373	$2,480,998	$105,000	$693,438	3
2023	433	$2,739,023	$109,157	$762,927	0

Consumers served, by year

2016582
2017529
2018530
2019527
2020745
2021488
2022373
2023433

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	$6,326	20th	51th	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	$11,961	27th	51th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	48.1%	47th	42th	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	83.6%	71th	79th	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	0.00	11th	9th	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	0.00	11th	9th	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	90.0%	85th	92th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 9 of 10 members.
Staff with disabilities	78.0%	50th	76th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 13.2 of 16.9 FTE.
Equity index	4.8	98th	97th	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	15.7%	67th	69th	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 31.8% of income; Part B varied by 14.4% (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 (1,374) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
Preventive services	231	231	100.0%
Housing and home modifications	104	104	100.0%
Peer counseling	64	64	100.0%
Assistive technology	38	38	100.0%
Prostheses and orthotics	7	7	100.0%
IL skills training	6	6	100.0%
Advocacy and legal services	5	5	100.0%
Recreational services	1	1	100.0%
Transportation	1	1	100.0%
Youth transition	1	1	100.0%
Other services	1	1	100.0%
All services	459	459	100.0%

Largest unmet demand

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

Assistive technology: 38 of 38 requests filled (100.0%).
Housing and home modifications: 104 of 104 requests filled (100.0%).
Peer counseling: 64 of 64 requests filled (100.0%).
Preventive services: 231 of 231 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	18	6	7
Mobility and transportation	3	1	2
Community-based living	146	60	71
Vocational	1	0	1
Self-care	244	137	105
Information access and technology	40	20	14
Personal resource management	16	3	10
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	2	0	2
Community and social participation	6	2	3

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	0
5 to 19	2
20 to 24	2
25 to 59	265
60 and older	164
Age unavailable	0

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	12
Mental or emotional	15
Physical	172
Hearing	8
Vision	2
Multiple disabilities	224
Other	0

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with Vermont residents with a disabilityCenter shares exclude 85 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	331	95.1%	91.3%	1.04
Black or African American	4	1.1%	0.9%	1.25
American Indian or Alaska Native	4	1.1%	0.3%	3.32
Asian	2	0.6%	0.8%	0.74
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	0	0.0%	0.0%	0.00
Two or more races	5	1.4%	4.7%	0.31
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	2	0.6%	2.0%	0.29

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.