DC Center for Independent Living

What the center reported

174Consumers served81 carried over, 93 new
625Information and referral contacts
$278,384Total income
$20,900Part B
$206,797Part C
85Goals achievedof 178 set
1Moved 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)	$20,900
Title VII Part C (direct federal)	$206,797
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$50,687
State government funds	$0
Local government funds	$0
Private and other	$0
Total income	$278,384

Eight years of reports

DC 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	200	$185,916	$0	$159,763	22
2017	247	$158,594	$0	$158,594	0
2018	375	$400,647	$0	$178,847	0
2019	400	$214,310	$20,900	$183,910	3
2020	406	$329,783	$0	$183,910	0
2021	262	$285,628	$0	$183,910	0
2022	623	$266,148	$25,674	$187,961	9
2023	174	$278,384	$20,900	$206,797	1

Consumers served, by year

2016200
2017247
2018375
2019400
2020406
2021262
2022623
2023174

Measures against peers

Percentiles place this center among the 349 centers reporting in 2023 (national) and among centers of similar size (size peers: quartile 1 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	$1,600	79th	61th	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	$3,275	69th	52th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	47.8%	47th	47th	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	90.4%	84th	82th	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	0.57	42th	39th	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	0.48	32th	38th	The same count against direct federal funding.
Service fill rate	98.6%	45th	44th	Consumers receiving a service as a share of consumers requesting it, across all service types except information and referral.
Board members with significant disabilities	100.0%	93th	89th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 4 of 4 members.
Staff with disabilities	77.0%	47th	16th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 1.7 of 2.2 FTE.
Equity index	26.5	39th	47th	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	27.8%	31th	29th	Coefficient of variation of total income across the years reported. Lower ranks higher.
Data-quality flags	0	54th	53th	Failed arithmetic checks in this year's report. Fewer ranks higher. Listed below.

Title VII funds (Parts B and C and Chapter 2) were 81.8% of income; Part B varied by 130.1% (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 (625) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
Housing and home modifications	210	209	99.5%
Personal assistance	168	168	100.0%
Advocacy and legal services	144	143	99.3%
IL skills training	110	107	97.3%
Peer counseling	99	94	94.9%
Preventive services	79	79	100.0%
Physical restoration	33	33	100.0%
Family services	31	28	90.3%
Counseling and related services	28	28	100.0%
Assistive technology	26	26	100.0%
Recreational services	17	17	100.0%
Youth transition	15	15	100.0%
Transportation	13	13	100.0%
Mental restoration	6	6	100.0%
Other services	6	5	83.3%
Vocational services	5	5	100.0%
All services	990	976	98.6%

Largest unmet demand

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

Family services: 28 of 31 requests filled (90.3%).
Peer counseling: 94 of 99 requests filled (94.9%).
IL skills training: 107 of 110 requests filled (97.3%).
Advocacy and legal services: 143 of 144 requests filled (99.3%).
Housing and home modifications: 209 of 210 requests filled (99.5%).
Assistive technology: 26 of 26 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	2	1	1
Communication	3	2	1
Mobility and transportation	10	10	0
Community-based living	97	37	60
Educational	8	6	2
Vocational	9	7	2
Self-care	8	6	2
Information access and technology	8	2	6
Personal resource management	8	6	2
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	2	1	1
Community and social participation	21	6	15
Other	2	1	1

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	4
5 to 19	6
20 to 24	18
25 to 59	79
60 and older	67
Age unavailable	0

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	23
Mental or emotional	53
Physical	54
Hearing	4
Vision	22
Multiple disabilities	4
Other	14

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with District of Columbia 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	7	4.0%	19.1%	0.21
Black or African American	153	88.4%	63.1%	1.40
American Indian or Alaska Native	0	0.0%	0.5%	0.00
Asian	1	0.6%	1.7%	0.35
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	2	1.2%	0.0%	31.56
Two or more races	1	0.6%	7.3%	0.08
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	9	5.2%	8.3%	0.63

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.