Access to Independence of San Diego, Inc.

What the center reported

The center lists its headquarters in CA. It appears here under Hawaii, the state its grant number names.

125Consumers served108 carried over, 17 new
278Information and referral contacts
$655,412Total income
$52,574Part B
$602,248Part C
116Goals achievedof 200 set
8Moved 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)	$52,574
Title VII Part C (direct federal)	$602,248
Title VII Chapter 2 (older individuals who are blind)	$0
Other federal funds	$0
State government funds	$0
Local government funds	$0
Private and other	$590
Total income	$655,412

Eight years of reports

Access to Independence of San Diego, Inc. 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	111	$431,314	$51,200	$380,114	0
2017	136	$567,882	$64,463	$461,869	2
2018	217	$591,182	$70,130	$520,852	27
2019	160	$605,696	$70,098	$535,598	18
2020	166	$805,696	$270,098	$535,598	13
2021	236	$679,285	$0	$535,598	26
2022	230	$822,834	$111,837	$547,394	19
2023	125	$655,412	$52,574	$602,248	8

Consumers served, by year

2016111
2017136
2018217
2019160
2020166
2021236
2022230
2023125

Measures against peers

Percentiles place this center among the 349 centers reporting in 2023 (national) and among centers of similar size (size peers: quartile 2 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	$5,243	25th	15th	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	$5,650	48th	44th	Total income divided by goals achieved. Lower ranks higher. Goals are self-reported and are not weighted by difficulty.
Goal achievement rate	58.0%	60th	67th	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	26.7%	20th	17th	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	6.40	85th	84th	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	1.33	50th	53th	The same count against direct federal funding.
Service fill rate	90.1%	26th	24th	Consumers receiving a service as a share of consumers requesting it, across all service types except information and referral.
Board members with significant disabilities	86.0%	77th	79th	The regulation requires more than 50%. 6 of 7 members.
Staff with disabilities	100.0%	90th	89th	Share of staff full-time equivalents filled by people with disabilities. 3.3 of 3.3 FTE.
Equity index	26.0	41th	41th	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	18.6%	55th	48th	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 99.9% of income; Part B varied by 87.1% (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 (278) and is not in this table.
Service	Requested	Received	Fill rate
Housing and home modifications	94	81	86.2%
IL skills training	91	91	100.0%
Advocacy and legal services	41	41	100.0%
Counseling and related services	34	28	82.4%
Assistive technology	31	31	100.0%
Peer counseling	31	28	90.3%
Transportation	30	30	100.0%
Other services	22	20	90.9%
Youth transition	21	16	76.2%
Personal assistance	18	12	66.7%
Vocational services	14	7	50.0%
Recreational services	6	6	100.0%
Communication services	1	0	0.0%
Preventive services	1	1	100.0%
All services	435	392	90.1%

Largest unmet demand

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

Vocational services: 7 of 14 requests filled (50.0%).
Personal assistance: 12 of 18 requests filled (66.7%).
Youth transition: 16 of 21 requests filled (76.2%).
Counseling and related services: 28 of 34 requests filled (82.4%).
Housing and home modifications: 81 of 94 requests filled (86.2%).
Peer counseling: 28 of 31 requests filled (90.3%).

Goals by category

Goals set, achieved and in progress, report year 2023
Goal category	Set	Achieved	In progress
Self-advocacy and self-empowerment	37	14	23
Communication	2	0	1
Mobility and transportation	3	2	1
Community-based living	46	34	12
Educational	12	10	2
Vocational	15	5	10
Self-care	3	0	3
Information access and technology	18	15	3
Personal resource management	6	1	5
Relocation from a nursing home or institution	16	8	8
Community and social participation	20	16	4
Other	22	11	10

Who the center served

Consumers by age
Age	Consumers
Under 5	0
5 to 19	11
20 to 24	13
25 to 59	57
60 and older	44
Age unavailable	0

Consumers by disability type
Disability	Consumers
Cognitive	10
Mental or emotional	18
Physical	39
Hearing	4
Vision	10
Multiple disabilities	41
Other	3

Race and ethnicity against the state's disability population

Consumers compared with Hawaii 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	32	25.8%	22.6%	1.14
Black or African American	3	2.4%	1.7%	1.43
American Indian or Alaska Native	2	1.6%	0.4%	4.58
Asian	30	24.2%	38.1%	0.63
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander	39	31.5%	10.6%	2.97
Two or more races	11	8.9%	19.4%	0.46
Hispanic or Latino (any race)	7	5.6%	7.2%	0.79

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.